On June 4, 2010, U.S. EPA released its much anticipated proposed standards for industrial boilers to reduce hazardous air pollutants ("HAPs"). Since their release, EPA has faced an outcry that the proposed standards are "fundamentally flawed" or "unachievable."
So what is the controversy?
EPA’s boiler standards are supposed to reflect the application of the maximum achievable
Back in 2007, U.S. EPA was sued by some States and environmental groups who challenged the legitimacy of the ozone standard -75 parts per billion (ppb)- selected by the Bush Administration. In 2009, the Obama Administration announced that it was reconsidering the 75 ppb standard.
Ostensibly 75 ppb remains on the table. However, U.S. EPA is likely to
On August 12th, the U.S .EPA released two proposed rules to address the potential gap that exists while States adopt rules to regulate greenhouse gases (GHGs) from large stationary sources. What U.S. EPA is really doing is making sure all fifty states will be regulating GHGs beginning January 2011.
On May 12, 2010, U.S. EPA finalized its controversial
U.S. EPA has released its CAIR replacement program called the "Transport Rule." In a previous post I discussed EPA’s efforts under the Transport Rule to address the Court’s ruling striking down the CAIR rule. After listening to a presentation by EPA, the structure of the Transport Rule is a little clearer.
The major issue identified by the Court
.jpg)
U.S. EPA released is long awaited replacement rule for the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) which was the controversial cap and trade program for coal-fired utilities. In December of 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled CAIR exceeded EPA’s regulatory authority and ordered the Agency to develop an new proposal.
Originally, the
On March 31st, a Federal District Court in Tennessee (6th Circuit) issued the latest decision in relation to litigation stemming from New Source Review (NSR) enforcement actions against electric coal fired utilities. The TVA Bull Run decision is another example of the inconsistent application of the test for determining when projects trigger NSR.
The NSR regulatory program continues to
Today, Ohio EPA released its response to the federal court ruling which struck down the exemption from BAT for sources that emit less than 10 tons per year. The memo makes clear that it supplants the February 2nd e-mail instructing staff to not issue air permits until the ruling was evaluated.
There are few
Major uncertainty surrounds Ohio’s air permtting program. I use the term "certainty" because that was the buzz word utilized when business groups fought hard for major reforms that eventually were passed in Senate Bill 265 in 2006.
Back in 2006, business groups were concerned that Ohio’s system for issuing air permits was far more onerous and unpredictable than other
On February 3rd Magistrate Judge Mark Able of the U.S. District Court in Columbus ruled that Ohio EPA (and really the Ohio General Assembly) violated that federal Clean Air Act by exempting small air pollution sources from stringent air pollution requirements. At issue was one major overhaul of Ohio’s air regulation included in state legislation (Senate Bill 265) back
Today, U.S. EPA announced it has officially thrown out the .075 ppm ozone standard proposed in 2008 by the Bush Administration. The Bush proposal would have reduced the standard from .08 ppm to .075 ppm. Now the EPA is proposing to set a new revised ozone standard somewhere between .06 ppm to .07 ppm. This from the