EPA Should Use Review of Mercury and Air Toxics 'Supplemental Analysis' to Put 'Co-benefits' in the GraveJune 12, 2017
In late April, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit paused five year-old litigation over the Environmental Protection Agency’s Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, while the Trump administration reviews the Obama administration’s legal and regulatory posture. Here’s how we got here:
April 29, 2017
In a double dose of good news, the D.C. Circuit Court this week put on hold litigation surrounding two major Obama-era Environmental Protection Agency rules for existing power plants.
On Thursday, a three-judge panel on the D.C. Circuit granted the EPA’s request to pause litigation over the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, also known as the Utility MACT. As I’ve reported before, this rule would cost $10 billion annually, yet its bizarre purpose is to protect a supposed population of pregnant subsistence fisherwomen who eat hundreds of pounds of self-caught fish during their pregnancies, despite all the signs along rivers and lakes advising...
January 31, 2017will use the Congressional Review Act to consider a joint resolution of disapproval...
January 9, 2017
Green Group Litigation Strategy #1...
January 4, 2017
On Tuesday, The Hill’s Timothy Cama reported:
An environmental group is launching a new advertising campaign against the confirmation of President-elect Donald Trump’s pick to head the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Clean Air Moms Action, a project of the Environmental Defense Action Fund, said Tuesday it is spending at least $100,000 on the campaign which centers on children's health concerns, targeting the Washington, D.C., area, and six states with senators who could swing the confirmation vote.
See the ad for yourself here. In fact, it is based on an egregious lie, and the truth of the matter demonstrates the...
December 20, 2016
The newly elected congressional majority should be ready and willing to help implement President-elect Donald Trump’s promise to tackle onerous regulations. But what about so called “non-regulatory programs” that have significant public policy and marketplace impacts?
Congress can address problems associated with such programs by defunding them or by bringing them under the authority of existing environmental laws.
Top on the list should be the Environmental Protection Agency’s Integrated Risk Information System, also known as IRIS. IRIS gains its authority simply as a line item inside EPA’s Office of Research and Development. As a research program, IRIS operates outside the regulatory process and its accountability systems.
December 12, 2016
This week on RealClear Radio Hour, Marc Edwards and Dan Liljenquist recount politically induced disasters from the perversion of science to the pension crisis.
My first guest is Marc Edwards, Professor of Environmental and Water Resources Engineering at Virginia Tech. Marc discusses institutional scientific misconduct in academic and government-funded science and details how the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention created and covered up both the D.C. and Flint, Michigan, lead and drinking water crises. He describes how upper management cultivates a culture of corruption to promote their policy agency agenda, risking loss of public trust in science.
November 2, 2016
The real victim in the controversy over the Dakota Access Pipeline is Dakota Access Services, the company behind the $3.7 billion project that would move almost 500,000 barrels of oil daily from the Bakken oil fields in North Dakota to a refining hub in Illinois. The operators of the pipeline are being jerked around by the government, environmentalists, and the Standing Rock Sioux, all of whom are acting in varying degrees of bad faith.
President Obama Yanked the Rug out from under Dakota Access Partners
The pipeline route is 99% on private land. As such, the federal government’s role is quite limited. In fact, the U.S. government’s jurisdiction extends only to the immediate area where the pipeline crosses navigable waterways.
After jumping through all the appropriate hoops, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permitted construction of the...
August 8, 2016would have you...
June 1, 2015
Last week, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) promulgated the Waters of the U.S. Rule, a regulation that purports to clarify which waters of the United States are subject to federal jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act (CWA).
The CWA regulates the discharge of pollution into navigable waters. Rather than limit the definition of “navigable waters” to mean waters that are interstate and “navigable in fact,” the Clean Water Act broadens the definition of “navigable waters” so as to include non-navigable waters, in order to afford federal regulators a greater degree of environmental oversight. Federal jurisdiction, therefore, extends beyond waters that are strictly “navigable.”
However, the Clean Water Act fails to establish an exact limitation on federal...