On Monday, June 28, 2021, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality’s (TCEQ) request for delegated permit authority over coal ash disposal under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).1
On June 25, 2021, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to rescind a Trump-era methane rule using its Congressional Review Act (CRA) authority, which includes special procedures that allow Congress and the President to rescind certain rules promulgated during a prior administration, within defined time limits. The Senate passed the CRA resolution disapproving the rule on April 28, 2021. The measure garnered bipartisan support in both chambers. Congress presented the resolution to President Biden, who signed it on June 30, 2021.
On June 3, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published in the Federal Register a rule adding three more per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) to the list of chemicals requiring toxic chemicals release reporting under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act and the Pollution Prevention Act, that is, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI). The PFAS added are perfluorooctyl iodide, potassium perfluorooctanoate and silver(I) perfluorooctanoate, which must be included in TRI reports due July 1, 2022.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) has formally repealed regulations establishing how the Agency would consider the availability of dose-response data (“Strengthening Transparency in Pivotal Science Underlying Significant Regulatory Actions and Influential Scientific Information,” 86 Fed. Reg. 469) (the Science Rule). The Science Rule, which was finalized and went into effect immediately on January 6, 2021, related specifically to studies describing the quantitative relationship between the dose or exposure of a pollutant, contaminant, or substance and its effect; the rule required, among other things, that EPA identify and give greater consideration to studies constituting “pivotal science” (defined as “the specific dose-response studies or analyses that drive the requirements or quantitative analyses of EPA significant regulatory actions or influential scientific information”) and make public all science that served as the basis for a significant regulatory action. (more…)
On May 24, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated and remanded First, Ninth, and Tenth Circuit rulings that sent climate change litigation to state courts (Order List: 593 U.S. – May 24, 2021). The Supreme Court’s orders come fresh off its May 17, 2021, decision in Mayor and City Council of Baltimore v. BP P.L.C., et al., in which the Supreme Court addressed appellate court review of a district court’s remand orders.
Earlier in May, the Texas Legislature passed a bill (SB 13) that would prevent Texas from investing in environmental, social, and governance (ESG) financial products that boycott Texas energy companies. If signed into law by Republican Gov. Greg Abbott, SB 13 would require Texas’ public pension funds to “sell, redeem, divest, or withdraw all publicly traded securities of [any] financial company …” that “boycott[s] energy companies.” (more…)
On May 20, 2021, U.S. President Joe Biden issued an executive order (EO) on “Climate-Related Financial Risk,” which established a comprehensive policy to advance disclosure and mitigation of climate-related financial risk in an effort to achieve the U.S. goal of net zero emissions by 2050.
On May 14, 2021, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rescinded a rule issued during the Trump administration that changed how EPA calculated and presented the costs and benefits of rules under the Clean Air Act (CAA). Advanced on the ground of providing greater transparency, the rule had required EPA to determine the benefits that a new regulation provided directly, while separately valuing the “co-benefits” that would accrue by reducing other pollutants not covered by the new regulation. Industry had argued that EPA regulations should be based solely on the value of reducing the emissions it was authorized to regulate — while opponents argued the rule would ignore obvious benefits and justify weakening regulation.
On May 10, 2021, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a notice in the Federal Register requesting comments on a new request for information to the commercial sterilization and fumigation sector about the use of ethylene oxide (EO). The request, which was initially distributed to nine EO commercial sterilization facilities, is part of EPA’s technology review of the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Pollutants (NESHAP). EPA explained that “[w]hile [initial] data gathering efforts have been successful, there are still several important information gaps that should be filled prior to any final rulemaking activity.” (more…)
On April 29, 2021, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it plans to add certain chemicals to companies’ annual release reporting requirements. The Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (EPCRA) established the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) to track releases of certain chemicals that EPA deemed a threat to human health and the environment. EPCRA requires certain facilities to issue annual reports showing their releases of chemicals so that such releases can be included on the TRI.