The Tenth Circuit denied environmental groups' petition to review approval of Utah's July 2019 revised SIP addressing regional haze. The groups argued EPA abused its discretion by approving the SIP because Utah's alternative measure did not satisfy CAA national visibility goals, and that the Agency ...
A district court denied EPA's motion to dismiss a lawsuit challenging its failure to perform required ESA consultations with FWS and NMFS before approving the state of Washington's limits on aquatic cyanide in 1993, 1997, and 2007. An environmental group argued that EPA failed to complete ESA §7 co...
In How Algorithm-Assisted Decisionmaking Is Influencing Environmental Law and Climate Adaptation, Ziaja provides a useful framework to analyze whether an algorithm-assisted decisionmaking (AADM) tool and its design process is procedurally equitable. Ziaja’s framework contains several different questions advocacy groups can use to analyze the AADM tools that are increasingly used for environmental resource governance, such as the INFORM and RESOLVE algorithms discussed in the article, which guide the allocation and distribution of water and energy resources.
Environmental, natural resource, and energy planning will continue to rely on increasingly complex algorithms. Are these processes then also doomed to be inaccessible to key stakeholders? Hopefully not. There are multiple steps to ensuring process and participatory equity. There is ease of access to the process, access to necessary information, and then there is the matter of having the right information to be able to meaningfully impact outcomes of algorithm-assisted decisionmaking processes.
Agencies responsible for water and energy systems increasingly rely on algorithm-assisted decisionmaking to regulate these systems and shepherd them through climate adaptation. Legal scholars, attorneys, and environmental equity advocates should care about this fundamental change in governance for three reasons. First, climate adaptation depends on these tools. Second, algorithmic tools are not policy-neutral; rather they embed value-laden assumptions and biases. And third, the “rules” of this new forum impede equity and democratic participation, without deliberate countermeasures.
The Third Circuit denied an environmental group's petitions to review EPA's approval of certain air pollution control technology use at industrial facilities in Pennsylvania. The group argued EPA violated the CAA by focusing exclusively on emissions from those facilities instead of examining their i...
The Third Circuit vacated EPA's 2022 decision to reverse its prior determination and to require an oil refinery in the Virgin Islands to obtain a PSD permit before it can resume operations. The refinery owner petitioned for review, arguing EPA's application of its reactivation policy—under which a...
The D.C. Circuit denied a group of fuel refineries' petitions to review EPA's rule extending compliance reporting deadlines under the Renewable Fuel Standard program. The group argued the rule violated the CAA by providing obligated parties less than 13 months' compliance lead time—from EPA's anno...
Curtis, Fisch, and Robertson's article, Do ESG Mutual Funds Deliver on Their Promises, is a timely and insightful piece with several important conclusions.
Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing is a strategy for allocating investment funds on the basis of the extent to which the operations of a company, or a portfolio of companies, affect the environment, advance social justice, or follow good corporate governance practices. It is of intense and increasing interest to millions of investors who seek to minimize financial risks and maximize their financial returns. It also appeals to investors who seek to align their investments with their core personal values.