Category:Uncategorized
Required Regulation? Challenge to BLM repeal of New Fracking Standards
Environmental and tribal groups have historically taken important roles in implementing and enforcing regulations to protect the environment. In a recent action, environmental and tribal groups took on the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in an attempt to quash BLM’s elimination of a rule regulating the chemicals used in fracking. Although the final rule was originally officially published and implemented in 2015, it never went into full effect due to major challenges brought by the oil and gas industry. However, the Trump administration recently repealed the rule in its entirety, prompting a lawsuit arguing that the BLM is required to promulgate regulations as part of its mission.
Once In, Always In
The Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) recently issued a guidance memorandum withdrawing the decades-old “once in, always in” policy. The policy prohibited facilities once considered to be major sources of emissions of hazardous air pollutants to be later reclassified. These facilities are always subject to the class Maximum Achievable Control Technology (“MACT”) standards, regardless of any newly implemented processes or controls that reduce emissions.
However, the EPA found that the policy was established upon an incorrect interpretation of the Clean Air Act. Facilities may now be reclassified as “area sources” if their emissions fall below the threshold and will be subject to less strict standards.
What Does a Federal Government Shutdown Mean for Compliance?
For the first time since 2013, on Saturday, January 20th, 2018, the U.S. government ran out of money when Congress failed to pass a spending bill to fund the federal government. Much of the federal government’s operations have ground to a halt due to the lack of funding. Because Congress is seemingly at an impasse over immigration policy, the shutdown may last several days, if not weeks. In light of Loyola’s upcoming symposium exploring what happens when regulation is not enforced, it is interesting to consider how, in a similar vein, the shutdown affects compliance.
The Effect on Compliance of Lowering Corporate Tax Rates is Uncertain
It is commonly accepted that lowering tax rates increases tax compliance and high tax rates encourage tax evasion. The recent U.S. tax reform bill, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, was enacted partly due to assumptions that lowered tax rates would increase tax compliance and recover lost revenue. Here, I examine the theoretical basis for the claim that lowering income taxes increases compliance, as well as the external evidence regarding the extent of increased compliance due to lowering tax rates.
REGISTER NOW for the 2018 Compliance Symposium!
“What is the Role of a Regulation if it is Not Enforced?”
Friday, February 16
9 a.m.–4 p.m.
Philip H. Corboy Law Center
25 E. Pearson Street
Power Rogers & Smith Ceremonial Courtroom, 10th Floor
Chicago, IL
The symposium will explore questions of theory and practice related to an administrative state that has such a largesse of regulations (and quasi-regulations in the form of interpretative guidance) that administrative agencies cannot possibly audit or enforce all of their expectations for regulated actors. The size and decentralized control of the administrative state poses questions of legal theory on the role of regulations in society if the state has no intention or lacks resources for enforcing them and practical questions for the regulated actors in how or when to comply with the regulations. But it also sets up a minefield for the regulated actor if enforcement agencies can play “gotcha” on technical strict liability rules which may be buried amid manuals or have been previously enforced. Although focusing on law, the symposium is intended to be multi-disciplinary and seeks to bring together scholars from law, ethics, political science, business, economics, and philosophy.
Trump Administration and BSEE Plan to Reopen Federal Waters to Offshore Drilling
A government agency created in response to the 2011 BP oil spill is proposing changes to its rules surrounding offshore drilling. The Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) was established to replace the former Minerals Management Service (MMS) agency in response to its perceived conflict of interest and poor regulatory oversight. Since 2011, the BSEE focused exclusively on safety. Now it seems its changing its tune to promote more offshore oil and gas drilling.
ICD-11 on the Horizon: How Soon Will Healthcare Providers Actually Need to Comply?
In October 2015, the tenth revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) was implemented in the United States. Three years earlier, however, ICD had already begun beta testing for its eleventh revision (ICD-11). The ICD-10 implementation came after repeated delays and substantial requirements for healthcare organizations to reach compliance with the new codes. The United States trudged through training and compliance struggles as it transitioned to ICD-10. The threat of ICD-11’s release in 2018 promises to have drastic and far-reaching effects on the compliance actions of healthcare organizations.
Deregulation of Uranium Mining or: How I Learned to Stop Regulating and Love the Bomb
Compliance professionals all over the country are paying close attention to the Trump administration’s deregulatory campaign. While deregulation in finance has received the most media attention, the uranium mining industry has been a quiet beneficiary of the President’s new regulatory scheme.
Waters of the United States
The Obama administration’s “Clean Water Rule” was designed to control pollution in approximately 60% of the country’s bodies of water. The Rule primarily extended current federal regulations to smaller bodies of water, requiring that pollution of rivers and wetlands be held to the same environmental penalties as larger bodies of water. However, the Trump administration has suspended enforcement of the regulation for two years. During that time, they will re-consider the definition of “waters of the United States.” The Trump administration intends to release a new version this year.
Delivering the Nuclear Promise . . . Revisited
I authored a post last year regarding the nuclear energy industry’s current initiative to reduce operational costs to compete with the ever-dropping cost of energy production. Coined “Delivering the Nuclear Promise,” the initiative aims to enlist cost-cutting initiatives such as reducing staffing and removing superfluous requirements that maintain large margin to regulatory thresholds. Companies have set hefty goals to bring the cost of nuclear energy production down to values that would make nuclear energy competitive against less expensive, highly backed, and not-as-clean, forms of energy. This all needs to be done without sacrificing safety.
In order to achieve these drastic measures, I will set forth the case for on-the-rise technologies, that while the nuclear energy industry does not currently have the infrastructure to support, will aide in this transition, and as I argue, ultimately be required in order to sustain this clean and necessary form of energy.