Jan 14: The U.S. Supreme Court has denied hearing two important and related air quality cases -- National Petrochemical v. South Coast Air Quality (Case No. 07-311), and Chamber of Greater Baton Rouge v. South Coast Air Quality (Case No. 07-333). In doing so, the High Court has let stand decisions of the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit.
On June 8, 2007, the D.C. Circuit, in Case Nos. 04-1200, 04-1201, decided South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA. The case involved five petitions for rehearing with regard to the vacatur and remand of a final rule implementing the eight-hour national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone under the Clean Air Act (CAA) [See Final Phase 1 Rule To Implement the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS, 69 Fed. Reg. 23,951 (Apr. 30, 2004) (codified at 40 C.F.R. parts 40, 51, 81) (2004 Rule)]. The petitions were filed by a group of Environmental Petitioners, the Chamber of Greater Baton Rouge et al. (Baton Rouge), National Petrochemical & Refiners Association (NPRA), American Chemistry Council et al. (ACC), and EPA.
According to the Appeals Court, the petitions overlapped in part, challenging principally the court’s interpretation of the statutory gap, described in Whitman v. American Trucking Ass’ns, 531 U.S. 457 (2001), that arises from the decision of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to change from a one-hour to an eight-hour measurement system for ozone, and the court’s construction of the CAA’s anti-backsliding provision. See S. Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 2006) [See WIMS 1/02/07].
The Appeals Court said, "None of these challenges has merit and we deny the petitions. However, we grant the joint request of EPA and the Environmental Petitioners to clarify the description of the required conformity determinations and to modify the scope of the vacatur of the 2004 Rule."
Earthjustice represented a group of public health and environmental organizations including the American Lung Association, Environmental Defense, the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Sierra Club; that challenged the EPA rule and then subsequently defended the court's December decision that overturned the rule. In explaining the Appeals Court decision, Earthjustice said, "Today's decision reaffirms that EPA violated the Clean Air Act by relaxing limits on ozone, or smog pollution, from large power plants, factories and other industrial sources. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia denied the EPA and industry petitions for rehearing, and actually clarified in even stronger terms that weakening air protections is illegal under federal law. The court characterized the industry's desired readings of the law as a 'glaring loophole' that nothing suggests Congress intended." The Appeals Court said, "EPA is urged to act promptly in promulgating a revised rule that effectuates the statutory mandate by implementing the eight-hour standard, which was deemed necessary to protect the public health a decade ago."
Access the Supreme Court order denying hearing (click here, Search South Coast Air). Access the Supreme Court Dockets for Case No. 07-311 (click here); and Case No. 07-333 (click here). Access the complete 8-page, June 8, 2007, Appeals Court opinion (click here). Access a June 8, 2007, release from Earthjustice (click here). Access the complete 40-page, December 22, 2006, Appeals Court opinion in the consolidated cases (click here). Access other related South Coast articles posted on the WIMS-eNewsUSA Blog (click here). [*Air]
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query South Coast Air Quality. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query South Coast Air Quality. Sort by date Show all posts
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Tuesday, January 02, 2007
South Coast Air Quality v. U.S. EPA
Dec 22: In the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit, Case No. 04-1200, consolidated with No. 04-1201, et al. The case consolidates challenges to the Final Phase 1 Rule To Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard, 69 Fed. Reg. 23,951 (Apr. 30, 2004) (codified at 40 C.F.R. parts 40, 51, 81) (hereinafter 2004 Rule), promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), 42 U.S.C. § 7401 et seq. The Appeals Court said in a unanimous ruling, "Because EPA has failed to heed the restrictions on its discretion set forth in the Act, we grant the petitions in part, vacate the rule, and remand the matter to EPA for further proceedings."
In describing the arguments, the Appeals Court said in these consolidated petitions, a host of parties challenge the 2004 Rule and related EPA decisions on rehearing. No petitioner disputes that the eight-hour standard must be implemented; instead, they differ as to how quickly it must be attained and under what constraints. Parties with similar concerns were grouped for briefing purposes, leaving four principal opponents to various aspects of the 2004 Rule: (1) the State petitioners, (2) the Environmental petitioners, (3) the Industry petitioners, and (4) the State of Ohio. A subset of the petitioners also intervened to support different aspects of the 2004 Rule to which other petitioners objected.
To summarize the challenges the Appeals Court said: The State and Environmental petitioners contend that EPA’s understanding of the interrelationship between Subpart 1 and Subpart 2 contravenes the Act and led to arbitrary and capricious choices reflected in the 2004 Rule. The State of Ohio contends that EPA erred by establishing an unreasonable timeframe for attainment. One Industry petitioner, the National Petrochemical & Refiners Association (NPRA), contends that EPA’s translation of the statutory one-hour Table 1, is flawed and thus arbitrary and capricious. Another Industry petitioner, the Chamber of Greater Baton Rouge (Baton Rouge), contends that EPA lacks authority to continue to enforce any one-hour requirements against areas with lower eight-hour classifications.
The State and Environmental petitioners, conversely, contend that EPA should have retained more of the one-hour control requirements to prevent backsliding, and the Environmental petitioners contend that EPA should not have revoked the one-hour standard at all.
In its 40-page opinion, the Appeals Court provides a lengthy review and analysis of the arguments and concludes, "Consistent with Whitman [Whitman v. Am. Trucking Ass’ns, 531 U.S. 457, 482-86 (2001)] and the Act, we grant the State petition and the Environmental petition, except with respect to the withdrawal of the one-hour NAAQS; we also deny the Industry petitions and we dismiss the Ohio petition. Accordingly, we vacate the 2004 Rule and remand the matter to EPA."
In a release, Earthjustice, who brought the court challenge on behalf of the American Lung Association, Environmental Defense, Sierra Club, and Natural Resources Defense Council said, "the Court held that EPA violated the Clean Air Act in relaxing limits on smog-forming pollution from large power plants, factories, and other sources in cities violating health standards." Earthjustice argued that EPA's action made no sense because it came after the Agency found that the previous ozone standard was too weak to protect public health. They said "The rule allowed more pollution in cities where the air was already unhealthy to breathe." Cities that were at risk for increased pollution according to Earthjustice included Chicago, Houston, Milwaukee, New York, Atlanta, Baltimore, Baton Rouge, Philadelphia, Sacramento, Washington (DC), Beaumont-Port Arthur, Boston, Dallas, Providence, and San Joaquin Valley, CA, among others.
U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), incoming Chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, issued a statement about the decision saying, "The court today ruled unanimously that EPA has failed to heed the restrictions on its discretion set forth in the Act, and therefore that the rule is invalid." Boxer said, "I am pleased that the Court of Appeals has seen through EPA’s transparent attempts to weaken implementation of the Clean Air Act’s rules for smog. This unanimous opinion from the Court of Appeals confirms that EPA’s approach is illegal. EPA must now throw out this rule and start anew. Because of the efforts of the South Coast Air Quality Management District, which brought this case, our citizens will not be forced to accept EPA’s plans to relax the smog rules. Smog kills people, it increases asthma and other respiratory illnesses, and it remains a major public health threat in many areas of the country. Sadly, we have once again had to rely on the court to tell EPA how to read the text of the Clean Air Act in a way that protects people, not polluters. When the new Congress convenes, we will scrutinize EPA’s approach to clean air very carefully to ensure that the health of our families is protected.”
Other parties challenging the EPA rules as too weak were the Clean Air Task Force (on behalf of the Conservation Law Foundation and Southern Alliance for Clean Energy), Louisiana Environmental Network, South Coast Air Quality Management District, and a coalition of states including Massachusetts, Delaware, Maine, New York, Pennsylvania, and the District of Columbia.
Access the complete opinion (click here). Access the Earthjustice release (click here). Access the statement from Senator Boxer (click here). Access a release from Environmental Defense (click here). Access links to various media coverage (click here). [*Air]
In describing the arguments, the Appeals Court said in these consolidated petitions, a host of parties challenge the 2004 Rule and related EPA decisions on rehearing. No petitioner disputes that the eight-hour standard must be implemented; instead, they differ as to how quickly it must be attained and under what constraints. Parties with similar concerns were grouped for briefing purposes, leaving four principal opponents to various aspects of the 2004 Rule: (1) the State petitioners, (2) the Environmental petitioners, (3) the Industry petitioners, and (4) the State of Ohio. A subset of the petitioners also intervened to support different aspects of the 2004 Rule to which other petitioners objected.
To summarize the challenges the Appeals Court said: The State and Environmental petitioners contend that EPA’s understanding of the interrelationship between Subpart 1 and Subpart 2 contravenes the Act and led to arbitrary and capricious choices reflected in the 2004 Rule. The State of Ohio contends that EPA erred by establishing an unreasonable timeframe for attainment. One Industry petitioner, the National Petrochemical & Refiners Association (NPRA), contends that EPA’s translation of the statutory one-hour Table 1, is flawed and thus arbitrary and capricious. Another Industry petitioner, the Chamber of Greater Baton Rouge (Baton Rouge), contends that EPA lacks authority to continue to enforce any one-hour requirements against areas with lower eight-hour classifications.
The State and Environmental petitioners, conversely, contend that EPA should have retained more of the one-hour control requirements to prevent backsliding, and the Environmental petitioners contend that EPA should not have revoked the one-hour standard at all.
In its 40-page opinion, the Appeals Court provides a lengthy review and analysis of the arguments and concludes, "Consistent with Whitman [Whitman v. Am. Trucking Ass’ns, 531 U.S. 457, 482-86 (2001)] and the Act, we grant the State petition and the Environmental petition, except with respect to the withdrawal of the one-hour NAAQS; we also deny the Industry petitions and we dismiss the Ohio petition. Accordingly, we vacate the 2004 Rule and remand the matter to EPA."
In a release, Earthjustice, who brought the court challenge on behalf of the American Lung Association, Environmental Defense, Sierra Club, and Natural Resources Defense Council said, "the Court held that EPA violated the Clean Air Act in relaxing limits on smog-forming pollution from large power plants, factories, and other sources in cities violating health standards." Earthjustice argued that EPA's action made no sense because it came after the Agency found that the previous ozone standard was too weak to protect public health. They said "The rule allowed more pollution in cities where the air was already unhealthy to breathe." Cities that were at risk for increased pollution according to Earthjustice included Chicago, Houston, Milwaukee, New York, Atlanta, Baltimore, Baton Rouge, Philadelphia, Sacramento, Washington (DC), Beaumont-Port Arthur, Boston, Dallas, Providence, and San Joaquin Valley, CA, among others.
U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), incoming Chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, issued a statement about the decision saying, "The court today ruled unanimously that EPA has failed to heed the restrictions on its discretion set forth in the Act, and therefore that the rule is invalid." Boxer said, "I am pleased that the Court of Appeals has seen through EPA’s transparent attempts to weaken implementation of the Clean Air Act’s rules for smog. This unanimous opinion from the Court of Appeals confirms that EPA’s approach is illegal. EPA must now throw out this rule and start anew. Because of the efforts of the South Coast Air Quality Management District, which brought this case, our citizens will not be forced to accept EPA’s plans to relax the smog rules. Smog kills people, it increases asthma and other respiratory illnesses, and it remains a major public health threat in many areas of the country. Sadly, we have once again had to rely on the court to tell EPA how to read the text of the Clean Air Act in a way that protects people, not polluters. When the new Congress convenes, we will scrutinize EPA’s approach to clean air very carefully to ensure that the health of our families is protected.”
Other parties challenging the EPA rules as too weak were the Clean Air Task Force (on behalf of the Conservation Law Foundation and Southern Alliance for Clean Energy), Louisiana Environmental Network, South Coast Air Quality Management District, and a coalition of states including Massachusetts, Delaware, Maine, New York, Pennsylvania, and the District of Columbia.
Access the complete opinion (click here). Access the Earthjustice release (click here). Access the statement from Senator Boxer (click here). Access a release from Environmental Defense (click here). Access links to various media coverage (click here). [*Air]
Monday, June 11, 2007
Appeals Court Denies Rehearing Of South Coast Ozone Case
Jun 8: In the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit, Case Nos. 04-1200, 04-1201. The case, South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, involves five petitions for rehearing with regard to the vacatur and remand of a final rule implementing the eight-hour national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone under the Clean Air Act (CAA) [See Final Phase 1 Rule To Implement the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS, 69 Fed. Reg. 23,951 (Apr. 30, 2004) (codified at 40 C.F.R. parts 40, 51, 81) (2004 Rule)]. The petitions were filed by a group of Environmental Petitioners, the Chamber of Greater Baton Rouge et al. (Baton Rouge), National Petrochemical & Refiners Association (NPRA), American Chemistry Council et al. (ACC), and EPA.
According to the Appeals Court, the petitions overlap in part, challenging principally the court’s interpretation of the statutory gap, described in Whitman v. American Trucking Ass’ns, 531 U.S. 457 (2001), that arises from the decision of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to change from a one-hour to an eight-hour measurement system for ozone, and the court’s construction of the CAA’s anti-backsliding provision. See S. Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 2006) [See WIMS 1/02/07].
The Appeals Court said, "None of these challenges has merit and we deny the petitions. However, we grant the joint request of EPA and the Environmental Petitioners to clarify the description of the required conformity determinations and to modify the scope of the vacatur of the 2004 Rule."
Earthjustice represented a group of public health and environmental organizations including the American Lung Association, Environmental Defense, the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Sierra Club; that challenged the EPA rule and then subsequently defended the court's December decision that overturned the rule. In explaining the decision, Earthjustice said, "Today's decision reaffirms that EPA violated the Clean Air Act by relaxing limits on ozone, or smog pollution, from large power plants, factories and other industrial sources. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia denied the EPA and industry petitions for rehearing, and actually clarified in even stronger terms that weakening air protections is illegal under federal law. The court characterized the industry's desired readings of the law as a 'glaring loophole' that nothing suggests Congress intended." The Appeals Court said, "EPA is urged to act promptly in promulgating a revised rule that effectuates the statutory mandate by implementing the eight-hour standard, which was deemed necessary to protect the public health a decade ago."
Access the complete 8-page opinion (click here). Access a release from Earthjustice (click here). Access other related South Coast articles posted on the WIMS-eNewsUSA Blog (click here). [*Air]
According to the Appeals Court, the petitions overlap in part, challenging principally the court’s interpretation of the statutory gap, described in Whitman v. American Trucking Ass’ns, 531 U.S. 457 (2001), that arises from the decision of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to change from a one-hour to an eight-hour measurement system for ozone, and the court’s construction of the CAA’s anti-backsliding provision. See S. Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 2006) [See WIMS 1/02/07].
The Appeals Court said, "None of these challenges has merit and we deny the petitions. However, we grant the joint request of EPA and the Environmental Petitioners to clarify the description of the required conformity determinations and to modify the scope of the vacatur of the 2004 Rule."
Earthjustice represented a group of public health and environmental organizations including the American Lung Association, Environmental Defense, the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Sierra Club; that challenged the EPA rule and then subsequently defended the court's December decision that overturned the rule. In explaining the decision, Earthjustice said, "Today's decision reaffirms that EPA violated the Clean Air Act by relaxing limits on ozone, or smog pollution, from large power plants, factories and other industrial sources. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia denied the EPA and industry petitions for rehearing, and actually clarified in even stronger terms that weakening air protections is illegal under federal law. The court characterized the industry's desired readings of the law as a 'glaring loophole' that nothing suggests Congress intended." The Appeals Court said, "EPA is urged to act promptly in promulgating a revised rule that effectuates the statutory mandate by implementing the eight-hour standard, which was deemed necessary to protect the public health a decade ago."
Access the complete 8-page opinion (click here). Access a release from Earthjustice (click here). Access other related South Coast articles posted on the WIMS-eNewsUSA Blog (click here). [*Air]
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Additional EPA Interpretations Of "South Coast" Decision
Mar 19: As reported on March 20 [See WIMS 3/20/07], U.S. EPA proposing to move forward with final actions on requests to redesignate 18 areas in Michigan, Ohio and West Virginia as meeting the national outdoor air quality standard for ground-level ozone. In doing so, the Agency made various interpretation regarding the December decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that rescinded EPA's rule that classified ozone nonattainment areas for the 8-hour standard [See WIMS 1/2/07, South Coast Air Quality v. U.S. EPA].
In its proposed approval and interpretation, the Agency said, "EPA proposes to find that the Court’s ruling does not alter any requirements relevant to these proposed redesignations that would prevent EPA from finalizing these redesignations. The EPA believes that the Court’s decision, as it currently stands or as it may be modified based upon any petition for rehearing that may be filed, imposes no impediment to moving forward with redesignation of these areas to attainment, because in either circumstance, redesignation is appropriate under the relevant redesignation provisions of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA’s longstanding policies regarding redesignation requests."
In addition on March 19, EPA's Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation Bill Wehrum issued a memo providing further guidance on the impacts of the South Coast Air Quality v. U.S. EPA decision. In the guidance memo, EPA said, "The court's mandate has not been issued and we have until March 22, 2007 to decide whether to seek rehearing on any aspect of the decision. Since the decision was announced, we have received many questions from the Regions, Federal, State, local agencies, and Tribes on its impact. The inquiries can be grouped into four primary questions and the purpose of this memo is to provide you responses to those questions as best we can at this time."
The very significant questions which EPA responds to in the Memo include: (1) Have State Implementation Plan (SIP) obligations changed as a result of the decision?; (2) Should States submit nonattainment SIPs by June of this year?; (3) Can ozone nonattainment areas with clean air be redesignated to attainment during the pendency of the court decision?; and (4) What transportation conformity, general conformity, and NSR requirements must be met at this time in 8-hour ozone areas?
Access EPA's Guidance Memo (click here). [*Air]
In its proposed approval and interpretation, the Agency said, "EPA proposes to find that the Court’s ruling does not alter any requirements relevant to these proposed redesignations that would prevent EPA from finalizing these redesignations. The EPA believes that the Court’s decision, as it currently stands or as it may be modified based upon any petition for rehearing that may be filed, imposes no impediment to moving forward with redesignation of these areas to attainment, because in either circumstance, redesignation is appropriate under the relevant redesignation provisions of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA’s longstanding policies regarding redesignation requests."
In addition on March 19, EPA's Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation Bill Wehrum issued a memo providing further guidance on the impacts of the South Coast Air Quality v. U.S. EPA decision. In the guidance memo, EPA said, "The court's mandate has not been issued and we have until March 22, 2007 to decide whether to seek rehearing on any aspect of the decision. Since the decision was announced, we have received many questions from the Regions, Federal, State, local agencies, and Tribes on its impact. The inquiries can be grouped into four primary questions and the purpose of this memo is to provide you responses to those questions as best we can at this time."
The very significant questions which EPA responds to in the Memo include: (1) Have State Implementation Plan (SIP) obligations changed as a result of the decision?; (2) Should States submit nonattainment SIPs by June of this year?; (3) Can ozone nonattainment areas with clean air be redesignated to attainment during the pendency of the court decision?; and (4) What transportation conformity, general conformity, and NSR requirements must be met at this time in 8-hour ozone areas?
Access EPA's Guidance Memo (click here). [*Air]
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
EPA Interprets "South Coast" In Redesignations In MI, OH, WV
Mar 20: U.S. EPA announced it is proposing to move forward with final actions on requests to redesignate 18 areas in Michigan, Ohio and West Virginia as meeting the national outdoor air quality standard for ground-level ozone. EPA said ozone air quality in these areas has improved enough to meet the standard, and the states have requested redesignation. In April 2004, EPA designated these areas as nonattainment because their air quality did not meet national outdoor air quality standards for ground-level ozone. The designations became effective in June 2004.
EPA had proposed to redesignate these areas, but final action on the redesignations has been held up pending Agency review of a December decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. That decision rescinded EPA's rule that classified ozone nonattainment areas for the 8-hour standard [See WIMS 1/2/07, South Coast Air Quality v. U.S. EPA]. EPA said the supplemental proposed rule sets forth its views on the potential effect of the Court’s ruling on a number of proposed redesignation actions.
Specifically, EPA indicates in the proposed rule, "EPA proposes to find that the Court’s ruling does not alter any requirements relevant to these proposed redesignations that would prevent EPA from finalizing these redesignations. The EPA believes that the Court’s decision, as it currently stands or as it may be modified based upon any petition for rehearing that may be filed, imposes no impediment to moving forward with redesignation of these areas to attainment, because in either circumstance, redesignation is appropriate under the relevant redesignation provisions of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA’s longstanding policies regarding redesignation requests."
In Michigan, the areas are Flint, Benton Harbor, Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo-Battle Creek, Lansing-East Lansing, Muskegon, Benzie County, Huron County, Mason County and Cass County. The Ohio areas are Lima, Canton-Massillon, and three areas that cross Ohio-West Virginia state boundaries. The last three areas are Marietta, Ohio, and Parkersburg, WV; Steubenville, Ohio, and Weirton, WV; and an area in Ohio across the Ohio River from Wheeling, WV.
In its supplemental proposed rule, EPA is seeking comment on its belief that final action on the redesignation proposals is appropriate under the Clean Air Act and long-standing policies on state redesignation requests. The Agency believes the court's ruling does not alter these requirements or prevent redesignation. EPA's supplemental proposal will be published soon in the Federal Register. EPA will accept comments on the proposal for 15 days from the date of publication.
Access a release (click here). Access the supplemental proposal (click here). Access a fact sheet (click here). [*Air]
EPA had proposed to redesignate these areas, but final action on the redesignations has been held up pending Agency review of a December decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. That decision rescinded EPA's rule that classified ozone nonattainment areas for the 8-hour standard [See WIMS 1/2/07, South Coast Air Quality v. U.S. EPA]. EPA said the supplemental proposed rule sets forth its views on the potential effect of the Court’s ruling on a number of proposed redesignation actions.
Specifically, EPA indicates in the proposed rule, "EPA proposes to find that the Court’s ruling does not alter any requirements relevant to these proposed redesignations that would prevent EPA from finalizing these redesignations. The EPA believes that the Court’s decision, as it currently stands or as it may be modified based upon any petition for rehearing that may be filed, imposes no impediment to moving forward with redesignation of these areas to attainment, because in either circumstance, redesignation is appropriate under the relevant redesignation provisions of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA’s longstanding policies regarding redesignation requests."
In Michigan, the areas are Flint, Benton Harbor, Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo-Battle Creek, Lansing-East Lansing, Muskegon, Benzie County, Huron County, Mason County and Cass County. The Ohio areas are Lima, Canton-Massillon, and three areas that cross Ohio-West Virginia state boundaries. The last three areas are Marietta, Ohio, and Parkersburg, WV; Steubenville, Ohio, and Weirton, WV; and an area in Ohio across the Ohio River from Wheeling, WV.
In its supplemental proposed rule, EPA is seeking comment on its belief that final action on the redesignation proposals is appropriate under the Clean Air Act and long-standing policies on state redesignation requests. The Agency believes the court's ruling does not alter these requirements or prevent redesignation. EPA's supplemental proposal will be published soon in the Federal Register. EPA will accept comments on the proposal for 15 days from the date of publication.
Access a release (click here). Access the supplemental proposal (click here). Access a fact sheet (click here). [*Air]
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
House Subcommittee Forums On Clean Air Act Issues
Jul 31: Representative Ed Whitfield (R-KY), Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Subcommittee on Energy and Power, announced bipartisan forums on today (July 31), and on Thursday, August 2, to examine state, local, and Federal cooperation in the Clean Air Act. The forums are intended to provide an opportunity for members of Congress to hear a broad range of perspectives from experts about their experiences in implementing the Clean Air Act.
Rep. Whitfield said, "During my time as Chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy and Power, we have had numerous hearings on specific rules under the Clean Air Act and we have passed a number of bills relating to those rules. The goal of these forums is not to talk about legislation or focus on any specific rule or provision of the Act, but rather to foster a broad, bipartisan discussion about the law. We will hear from experts who live with this Act every day, about their experience implementing the law and coordinating with the various levels of government that share responsibility for our nation's air quality."
Today's forum began at 2:00 PM. The participants for today's meeting included representatives from: Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality; Indiana Department of Environmental Management; New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services; South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control; Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG); Imperial County Air Pollution Control District; Navajo Nation Environmental Protection Agency; and Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Additionally, a brief statement was submitted by a number of environmental groups including: Center for Biological Diversity; Conservation Law Foundation; Earthjustice; League of Conservation Voters; Natural Resources Defense Council; Sierra Club; and US Climate Action Network. Thursday's forum will also begin at 2:00 PM and includes representative from: AZ, TX, South Coast Air Quality Management District, DE, Dayton Regional Air Pollution Control Agency; OH, and Southern Ute Indian Tribe.
Participant were requested to respond to a list of 6 questions including:
In your agency's experience implementing the Clean Air Act (CAA), what is working well? What is not working well?
Do state and local governments have sufficient autonomy and flexibility to address local conditions and needs?
Does the current system balance federal, state, and tribal roles to provide timely, accurate permitting for business activities, balancing environment protection and economic growth?
Does the CAA support a reasonable and effective mechanism for federal, state, tribal and local cooperation through State Implementation Plans? How could the mechanism be improved?
Are cross-state air pollution issues coordinated well under the existing framework?
Are there other issues, ideas or concerns relating to the role of federalism under the CAA that you would like to discuss?
Access the Forum website and link to the today's Participant responses, the environmental group statement, and a video at the conclusion (click here). Access a list of Participants and responses for the August 2 Forum (click here). [#Air, #MIAir]
GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals
Thursday, January 30, 2014
WIMS Environmental HotSheet 1/30/14
<> FULL COMMITTEE HEARING: U.S. Crude Oil Exports: Opportunities and Challenges- Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee. The purpose of this oversight hearing is to explore opportunities and challenges associated with lifting the ban on
- New Study: U.S. Exports can save American consumers up to $6.6 billion annually by 2020 - Preliminary results from a new study on exports of crude oil show that consumers can save money at the pump, according to American Petroleum Institute (API) Vice President for Regulatory and Economic Policy Kyle Isakower.
<> Farm Bill Conference Report Passes House - David Rogers reported yesterday at Politico that, "Given up for dead just months ago, a new five-year farm bill easily cleared the House Wednesday morning, raising hopes that Congress can send it to President Barack Obama next week. "The strength of the House's 251-166 vote makes this easier, and it's now expected that when the bill papers arrive in the Senate Thursday, cloture. . .
- House-Senate Negotiators Announce Bipartisan Agreement on Final Farm Bill– From House Ag Committee: House and Senate agriculture leaders announced a bipartisan, bicameral agreement on a five-year farm bill that will reduce the deficit, grow the economy and provide certainty to the 16 million Americans whose jobs depend on agriculture. The Agricultural Act of 2014 contains major. . .
- House-Senate Negotiators Announce Bipartisan Agreement on Final Farm Bill - From Senate Ag Committee
<> Shell To Stop Alaska Exploration Program In 2014 - New Shell CEO Ben van Beurden updated on the company's priorities and indicated that the recent Ninth Circuit Court decision against the Department of the Interior raises substantial obstacles to Shell's plans for drilling in offshore Alaska. As a result, Shell has decided to stop its exploration programme for
<> Mayors from 10 major US cities unite to boost energy efficiency in buildings - The mayors from 10 major U.S. cities and Natural Resources Defense Council announced they will undertake a united effort -- new City Energy Project -- to significantly boost energy efficiency in their buildings, a move that combined could cut as much climate change pollution as generated by 1 million to 1.5 million passenger vehicles every year, and lower energy bills by nearly $1 billion annually.
<> New Energy Efficiency Standards for Metal Halide Lamp Fixtures to Save on Energy Bills and Reduce Carbon Pollution - Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz announced that the Department has finalized new energy efficiency standards for metal halide lamp fixtures
<> Divest-Invest: Philanthropy initiative launched - A group of like-minded foundations have come together in a new initiative to divest our assets from fossil fuels and to invest in climate solutions in the new energy economy.
<> Oversight Hearing: NRC's Implementation of the Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendations and other Actions to Enhance and Maintain Nuclear Safety - Senate Environment & Public Works Full and Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety hearing
<> Press Conference: Labor, Environmentalists, Elected Leaders to Oppose Secret Trade Agreement, Trans-Pacific Partnership – Friday groups will host a press conference in solidarity with the International Day of Action surrounding the highly secretive global trade agreement, Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP).
<> California Facing Worst Drought on Record - The most populated state in the country is facing what may be the worst drought in a century of record-keeping. The last week of January is the midway point of the winter wet season, and accumulated precipitation since July is the lowest on record.
<> Negotiating a Post-2020 Climate Agreement in a Mosaic World - As we approach the end game of serious negotiations for a post-2020 international climate regime, Brian Flannery a scientist at Resources for the Future describes the difficult road ahead.
<> United States joins push for transparency in Extractive Industries - The United States is now preparing to participate in the EITI, Clare Short and panelists representing implementing countries, mining companies, and civil society will discuss this and other high profile changes to the transparency regime.
<> Emmett Center Files Amicus Brief in U.S. Supreme Court GHG Case on Behalf of South Coast Air District - UCLA's Emmett Center filed an amicus curiae brief yesterday in Utility Air Regulatory Group (UARG) v. EPA, the U.S. Supreme Court case that will determine whether EPA's greenhouse gas emissions rules under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration section of the Clean Air Act are valid. Arguing on behalf of the South Coast Air Quality. . .
<> Coral or coal decision looms for Australia's Great Barrier Reef - MELBOURNE (Reuters) - Australia's Great Barrier Reef watchdog is to decide by Friday whether to allow millions of cubic meters of dredged mud to be dumped near the fragile reef to create the world's biggest coal port and possibly unlock $28 billion in coal projects.
Thursday, May 21, 2015
[WIMS] Environmental HotSheet 5/21/15
| National / International News |
| <> Obama tells Coast Guard grads climate change menaces U.S. - Rising seas and thawing permafrost caused by warmer global temperatures threaten U.S. military bases and will change the way the U.S. armed services defend the country, President Barack Obama said on Wednesday |
| <> America's Trade Ambassador: Tackling Environmental Challenges Through Trade - Two decades ago, environmental provisions under NAFTA were relegated to a side agreement, with only a single enforceable obligation to "effectively enforce your own environmental laws" -- in contrast, the most recent trade agreements contain extensive, enforceable environmental commitments. |
| <> Despite Veto Threat House Approves COMPETES Bill - The House of Representatives approved the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2015 (H.R. 1806), which GOP members called "a comprehensive, pro-science, fiscally responsible bill to keep
|
| <> USDA to Give Priority Funding for Regional Economic Development Projects - The new Regional Development Priority (RDP) policy will make it easier for rural communities to access resources to invest in long-term community development efforts by giving priority to applications for Rural Development programs that include regional partnerships and strategies.
|
| <> House Passes Several Science Committee Bills - The House of Representatives passed H.R. 874, H.R. 1162, H.R. 1119, H.R. 1156, H.R. 1561, and H.R. 1158 by voice vote under suspension of the rules. The bills had strong bipartisan support -- most of these bills passed the House last Congress and were not taken up by the Senate. |
| <> The IMF says we spend $5.3 trillion a year on fossil fuel subsidies. How is that possible? - The IMF report is using "subsidy" to refer to the fact that users of oil, gas, and coal don't pay the full price for all the environmental damage these fossil fuels cause.
|
| <> Stabenow, Peters, Alexander Introduce Vehicle Innovation Act - U.S. Senators Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Gary Peters (D-MI), along with Lamar Alexander (R-TN), today introduced the bipartisan Vehicle Innovation Act (VIA) to promote investments in research and development of clean vehicle technologies that will create more fuel efficient vehicles, reduce dependence on foreign oil and support American auto manufacturers. |
| <> EPA: Launching a New Era of State, Tribal, Local and International Partnerships - EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy highlights some best practices, innovative solutions and successes in building partnerships. |
| <> House Hearing On Issues Facing Civilian and Postal Service Vehicle Fleet Procurement - Witness Testimony and webcast |
| <> FEMP Seeking Public Comment on Draft M&V Guidelines - The measurement and verification (M&V) document provides guidelines for measuring and verifying energy, water, and cost savings associated with federal energy savings performance contracts (ESPCs). |
| <> New Initiatives to Accelerate the Commercialization of Nanotechnology - May 20, the National Economic Council and the Office of Science and Technology Policy held a forum at the White House to discuss opportunities to accelerate the commercialization of nanotechnology. |
| <> Oil Giants Band Together to Add Voice to Climate Debate - Europe's largest oil companies are banding together to forge a joint strategy on climate-change policy, alarmed they'll be ignored as the world works toward a historic deal limiting greenhouse gases -- a public announcement expected as early as next month |
| <> TransCanada's Keystone Pipeline Network Under Investigation by U.S. Fed Regulators - A month after revealing that TransCanada is under acompliance review for the Keystone 1 Pipeline, the Pipeline Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)disclosed it is also investigating the operations of KeystoneXL's southern route, renamed the Gulf Coast Pipeline when the project was split in half -- the results of these investigations could play a part in President Obama's final decision on the Keystone XL permit that TransCanada needs to complete its Keystone pipeline network. |
| <> From Small Cars to Pickup Trucks, Automakers Aren't Just Meeting Efficiency Standards, They're Exceeding Them - The emissions and efficiency standards for vehicles have been a big success, according to a new analysis by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). |
| <> Groups File Lawsuit Calling for Federal Government Action on Soot Pollution - Physicians for Social Responsibility-Los Angeles and Sierra Club, represented by Earthjustice, filed a lawsuit today in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California in Los Angeles against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for its failure to act on the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) plan to reduce particulate matter, or soot. |
| <> NOAA Study Confirms BP Oil Spill Led to Dolphin Deaths in Northern Gulf of Mexico - Environmental groups said since the BP oil disaster five years ago, ongoing findings deliver truths omitted by BP's ads: the oil disaster's negative effects are increasingly clear, present and far from resolved. |
| |
| <> Committee for a Better Arvin v. U.S. EPA - 5/20/15. In the |
| Federal Register Highlights The following is an alert of Environmental Federal Register announcements that may be of interest. (Click here to access today's complete Federal Register index with links to complete announcements). |
| <> Nothing We're Tracking Today (click for the complete Energy & EPA announcements) |
| |
| <> U-M Researchers win Award for Paper on Phosphorus in Lake Erie - Lead author Donald Scavia, and a team of researchers will receive the Chandler-Misener Award for the most notable paper, Assessing and addressing the re-eutrophication of Lake Erie: Central basin hypoxia, in the 2014 edition of the Journal of Great Lakes Research. [Link to the paper] |
| <> Spring water levels of Lake Huron highest since 1998 - An unseasonably cool and wet summer last year started the rise, which didn't stop; Lake Huron skipped its usual seasonal decline, which, on average, begins in July. |
| <> Early forecast says toxic algae could be lighter at Lake Erie - In an early projection released on Tuesday, scientists said that so far, the Maumee River is carrying less phosphorus to the western part of the lake. |
| |
| <> Target budget agreement includes additional money for Michigan roads, schools - Gov. Rick Snyder and legislative leaders agreed today on spending targets for the fiscal year 2016 budget that includes an additional $400 million in General Fund money to help repair Michigan roads and bridges while work continues on a long-term solution to the state's infrastructure needs. |
| <> House panel approves Rep. Lauwers resolution for GMO food labeling - The MI House Committee on Agriculture approved House Resolution 89, introduced by state Rep. Dan Lauwers (R-Brockway Twp), urging Congress to adopt a national label program for genetically modified food. |
| <> MDNR Accessibility Advisory Council to meet June 2 in Okemos - The council's purpose is to make recommendations to the department director and staff regarding accessibility, as well as provide input, advice and guidance on the development, management and planning associated with providing accessible recreation opportunities to all users statewide. |
| <> Business expansion, community improvement project win state approval - The Michigan Economic Development Corporation today announced Michigan Strategic Fund approval of a business expansion and a community improvement project that are expected to generate $5.5 million in investments and create 88 new jobs. |
| <> Detroit Training Institute of Technology students renovate historic Belle Isle shelter in preparation for return of public transportation - Through partnership efforts with the Department of Natural Resources and the State Historic Preservation Office, the Detroit Training Institute of Technology and its students are renovating the historic structure, which will serve as an island transportation stop this summer for Pedicab and horse-and-carriage ride services. |
| <> MDOT's Steudle makes list of top public sector innovators - Kirk Steudle, director of the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT), was recently listed as one of the "Top 25 Doers, Dreamers and Drivers" by Government Technology magazine. |
| Newly introduced bills and bills that are moving, if any, are listed below. Click on the bill number for complete status, full text, & analyses. Uppercase is Senate action; lowercase is House action. Otherwise, for a complete list of environmental legislation this session (click here). |
| Daily Activity (5/20/15) |
| IN THE HOUSE |
| HB 4093 of 2015 Appropriations; zero budget; department of environmental quality; provide for fiscal year 2015-2016. Creates appropriation act. [House conferees named] |
| HB 4449 of 2015 Environmental protection; air pollution; air emission fees; modify. [3rd Read] |
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
