The Supreme Court will soon hear a case that may alter the regulation of carbon dioxide emissions under the Clean Air Act and expand the reach of the nondelegation doctrine.
By Garrett S. Kral, Esq.*
*Garrett S. Kral is a former U.S. EPA official and political appointee for the Trump administration.
Policymakers should take a closer look at the way the effects of climate change are taking their toll on our most essential workers in agriculture, manufacturing, and emergency response.
On October 1, 2020, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized text for a final rule that proposed to change the way facilities that emit hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) are regulated under the Clean Air Act.[i] The rule, titled Reclassification of Major Sources as Area Sources Under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act, purports to implement a plain language interpretation of Section 112 of the Clean Air Act.[ii] In practical effect, the final rule provides that a “major source” can reclassify to “area source” status at any time after reducing its actual or potential hazardous air pollutants (HAP) emissions to below the major source threshold of 10 tons per year (tpy) of any single HAP and 25 tpy of any combination of HAPs.[iii] Additionally, the rule amends Clean Air Act requirements regarding compliance dates, notification, and record keeping.[iv]
The CEQ’s new regulations seek to make NEPA more efficient for agencies. Could transforming NEPA into a regulatory commission solve its efficiency problems while protecting, and building upon, its effectiveness?
On September 23, 2020, California Governor Gavin Newson issued an executive order[1] that is expected to reduce the impact of climate change by drastically transforming the State's transportation industry. California experiences many unique climate change-related problems. For instance, as a result of climate change, the duration of California's wildfire season has more than doubled since 1980.[2] Indeed, this year, California is experiencing a record-breaking burn,[3] with wildfires scorching millions of acres of land.[4] The executive order, in an attempt to attenuate some of these climate change-related impacts on the State, requires all new passenger vehicles sold in California to be zero-emission by 2035, effectively banning the sale of new gasoline-powered vehicles in just fifteen years.[5]
Bike sharing is considered an environmental-friendly way of commuting.[1] It reduces people’s needs for driving and hence reduces carbon emission.[2] It also provides a solution to the “last mile” issue in urban commuting and promotes the development…
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) recently released the final SAFE Vehicles Rule. The rule sets forth requirements for emissions and efficiency in vehicles for model years 2021-2026 and revokes the Clean Air Act waiver to California.
Should the EPA regulate fracking more heavily? Currently, states that benefit financially from fracking regulate the industry.
Chlorpyrifos has been the subject of much regulation in recent years. With the European Union on track to ban large-scale agricultural use of chlorpyrifos, where does the EPA stand on this hazardous chemical?
