Updated July 31, 2020
As of July 31, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) has approved 15 surface disinfectant products to make on-label claims of efficacy directly against the SARS-CoV-2 virus, the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19. This marks the first time since the novel coronavirus pandemic began that EPA has reviewed and approved testing data on the SARS-CoV-2 virus itself. The registrants of these products, which include dilutable, ready-to-use, and wipe formulation types, can now update the product labeling registered with EPA to include directions for use and claims directly against SARS-CoV-2. The registrants will also be permitted to market and advertise their efficacy against the SARS-CoV-2 virus, consistent with all applicable EPA regulations. EPA has indicated that it is planning to review and approve on a rolling basis additional products for on-label claims against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. It has been processing these on an expedited basis since May.
As part of the increased of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed new use restrictions that may limit imports of certain products into the United States.
On July 8, 2020, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published proposed amendments to the 2013 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters. The proposed amendments, the result of three remands issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, revise certain maximum achievable control technology (MACT) limits and provide more explanation about other aspects of the rule.
On July 2, 2020, in Sierra Club v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit rejected the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) interpretation of the scope of its obligations to review permits under Title V of the Clean Air Act (CAA). The court found that the plain language of EPA’s regulations requires EPA to review whether a state-issued Title V permit complies with all applicable CAA requirements, not only the requirements the state included in the permit. The issue may end up in the U.S. Supreme Court, as it diverges from a recent ruling by the Fifth Circuit.
On June 29, 2020, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) amended its COVID‑19‑related temporary enforcement policy. As previously reported, EPA issued temporary COVID-19 Enforcement Guidance on March 26, 2020, providing guidelines on how EPA will, in certain cases, exercise discretion in enforcing environmental legal obligations during the COVID-19 pandemic. (more…)
On June 26, 2020, a federal district court ruled that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is not required to perform a risk assessment every time it revises its technology-based standards for a hazardous pollution source. Rather, the EPA is required to conduct a risk assessment only in connection with its initial adoption.
Companies have started reporting their manufacture or imports of newly designated high-priority substances under the Toxic Substances Control Act—and paying EPA costs for evaluating the substances’ risk. Sidley lawyers explain the risk evaluation process and how companies can strategically engage with EPA on the scope of risk evaluations.
On February 18, 2020, a group of states and a national trade union filed separate petitions seeking administrative reconsideration of the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA or Agency) recently finalized Clean Air Act Risk Management Plan (RMP) reconsideration rule (the Reconsideration Rule). The Reconsideration Rule became effective on December 19, 2019, and rescinds numerous provisions of the Obama administration’s January 2017 amendments to EPA’s RMP regulations under the Clean Air Act (the Amendments).
Topics discussed this week include:
- EPA proposes to decline to set CERCLA financial assurance rule for electric power industry.
- D.C. Circuit upholds RCRA transfer-based exclusion.
- EPA proposes renewable volume obligations for 2020.
- EPA issues final enforcement policy on coordination with and delegation to states.
The definition of waters of the United States is central to the CWA. At its core, the Act bans “the discharge of any pollutant” except in compliance with other provisions of the Act, such as the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) permitting program. 33 U.S.C. § 1311(a). “Discharge of a pollutant” is defined in relevant part as “any addition of any pollutant to navigable waters from any point source,” where (i) “navigable waters” are “the waters of the United States,” and (ii) a “point source” is “any discernible, confined and discrete conveyance, including but not limited to any pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fissure, container, rolling stock, concentrated animal feeding operation, or vessel or other floating craft, from which pollutants are or may be discharged.” See 33 U.S.C. §§ 1362(7), (12) and (14). (more…)