We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. Learn more here.Close Me
"that state permitting
authorities have not had sufficient time to develop necessary
permitting infrastructure and to increase their GHG permitting
expertise and capacity. By the same token, EPA and the state
permitting authorities have not had the opportunity to develop and
implement streamlining approaches.
In other words, subjecting more facilities to the GHG rule
would still pose a risk of tying the system in knots, so EPA's
not going there – at least not yet.
EPA also promulgated some revisions to 40 CFR Part 52 to
facilitate use of plantwide applicability limits for GHG
sources. Most importantly, the regulations will permit
GHG-only sources (sources that are not major sources for non-GHG
pollutants) to utilize GHG PALs and retain their minor source
status with respect to other pollutants.
EPA is fond of describing its GHG regulatory program as a common
sense approach. It is certainly true that, so long as EPA
regulates GHGs under existing CAA authority, today's rule
qualifies as common sense. It's still not going to please
many people.
To view Foley Hoag's Law and the Environment Blog
please click
here
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has published a proposed rule entitled Response to Petition for Rulemaking; Findings of Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls to Amend Provisions Applying to Excess Emissions During Periods of Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction.
Last week, the European Parliament rejected a proposal to reduce the quantity of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions allowances in order to fix a supply-demand imbalance in the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS).
It may be time for our federal courts to rethink their reluctance to accept major environmental claims that the courts of other countries are simply not yet able to handle.
After being taken to task by states and its own Inspector General for lack of final guidance on Vapor Intrusion, EPA has just released draft guidance documents for hazardous substances and petroleum products for comment.
California's cap-and-trade program mandates that certain covered entities acquire allowances for each metric ton of greenhouse gas (GHG) they emit during specified compliance periods.
Last Friday, EPA announced release of its draft proposal to revise the effluent guidelines and standards for the steam electric power generating industry, last revised in 1982.
On April 19, 2013, EPA released the proposed "Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category" (Steam Electric ELG). The proposed Steam Electric ELG would revise the existing technology-based effluent limitations guidelines [40 CFR 423] for most steam electric power plants and their discharges to U.S. waters or POTWs.
In a decision that should not have come as a surprise to anyone, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Thursday, in "Conservation Northwest v. Sherman", that the Bureau of Land Management and other agencies implementing the Northwest Forest Plan could not amend the NFP.
