Tag:EPA
PFAS Contamination Crisis; States Urge EPA to Defy Trump Deregulation
President Trump has made his opinion of federal regulations known from the very start of his presidency. He clearly believes that federal regulations, especially those established by the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), inhibit economic growth and unduly burden American businesses. However, it is equally unclear how his deregulatory efforts have benefitted anyone other than corporate America. Rather than utilizing his considerable influence to protect the health of the American people, President Trump and his administration have been hard at work unraveling such protections, much to the frustration of the states.
Coal Ash Regulation: Revisited
Power plants generate a residue after burning coal called coal ash. In October 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established standards to address the environmental dangers and health risks of coal ash. In May 2017, industry officials petitioned the EPA to reconsider the rule, claiming adverse effects due to high compliance costs. The EPA agreed to review the coal ash regulations and announced one of two proposals to amend regulations in March 2018. The new proposal provides facilities more flexibility in coal ash disposal based on their needs.
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.
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.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium-Duty and Heavy-Duty Vehicles
Under the Obama Administration, the EPA passed Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium-Duty and Heavy-Duty Vehicles. The regulation aimed to reduce climate change-causing emissions from the transportation sector, particularly the pollution caused by trucks. However, following the voiced concerns of stakeholders in the glider and trailer industry, the Trump Administration has issued a notice of repeal of emission requirements for glider vehicles, glider engines, and glider kits.
The EPA’s Smart Sectors Program
In October 2017, the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) launched the Smart Sectors Program, a program that creates a collaborative partnership between the EPA and regulated sectors such as the automotive, agriculture, and mining industries. The program provides a platform for the EPA and regulated sectors to collectively develop approaches to protect the environment, public health, and the economy.
Coal Ash Regulation
Power plants generate a residue after burning coal called coal ash, more formally known as coal combustion residuals (CCRs). In October 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established national guidelines to address the environmental dangers and health risks of coal ash. In May, nearly two years after the rule regulating the disposal of CCRs from electric utilities came into effect, industry officials petitioned the EPA to reconsider the rule, claiming adverse effects.
Using Deregulation to End the War on Coal and Oil
Environmental regulation has been heavily targeted by President Trump since the first days of his presidency, and even throughout his campaign. He announced early on that he wanted to cut general business regulations by at least 75%. His justification was that he wanted to remove red tape and delays and promote industry growth and economic development. The two industries potentially most affected by changes to environmental regulations are the oil industry and the coal mining industry.
One of this administration’s first big moves towards environmental deregulation was withdrawing from the Paris Accord. Against the advice of many leaders in the tech and fossil fuel industry, Trump chose to withdraw, stating that the terms of the accord were not as favorable to the United States. Experts say the support of the Paris Accord stems from a general trend towards reducing emission and creating more sustainable sources as a better investment than coal and oil, and a more “global framework”. Although some experts and leaders in the fossil fuel industry have been denouncing the changes, others are consulting with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Interior Department on policy changes and leading the teams created to evaluate and remove regulations.
Harvey Heralds Change: The Combusting Compliance of Emergency Response to Hazardous Materials
In the wake of Hurricane Harvey’s severe flooding, the Arkema chemical plant in Crosby, Texas has made quite the media splash. Rising waters left the plant without power, forcing workers to transfer volatile organic peroxides into large refrigerated trucks with independent generators. In up to six feet of water, several of the trucks’ refrigeration systems failed, resulting in combustion of the hydrogen peroxide, a hazardous material under the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards. This is not the first example of chemical plants having issues with natural disasters; there were significant hazardous material concerns after Hurricane Katrina in 2005 and more recently the Fukushima nuclear plant in 2011. With no indication that these problems will be resolved, it is important to once again look at regulations placed on chemical plants in response to emergency.