89 FR 37224
EPA announced the availability of proposed interim registration review decisions for bromine, and proposed final registration review decisions for agrobacterium radiobacter, polybutene resins, and porcine zona pellucida.
EPA announced the availability of proposed interim registration review decisions for bromine, and proposed final registration review decisions for agrobacterium radiobacter, polybutene resins, and porcine zona pellucida.
EPA finalized amendments to the procedural framework rule for conducting risk evaluations under TSCA to better align with the statutory text and applicable court decisions, to reflect the Agency's experience implementing the risk evaluation program following enactment of the 2016 TSCA amendments, and to allow for consideration of future scientific advances in the risk evaluation process without need to further amend the Agency's procedural rule.
United States v. Sunoco Pipeline, L.P., No. 1:24-cv-00238-SJD (S.D. Ohio Apr. 29, 2024). Under a proposed consent decree, a settling CWA defendant must pay a civil penalty of $550,000 in addition to $1,250,000 to compensate for harm to natural resources in connection with crude oil escaping from a ruptured pipeline, contaminating waters of the United States, and causing damage to natural resources.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) enforcement program has long been the backbone of environmental enforcement in the United States. That program may now be bound for dramatic change. This Article analyzes the threats posed to the Agency’s program by the U.S. Supreme Court’s forthcoming decision in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy, in which three constitutional questions presented cut to the core of administrative enforcement.
Supplemental environmental projects (SEPs) have received a growing amount of attention in recent years, from the Donald Trump Administration banning their use in settlements, to regulation and guidance from the Joseph Biden Administration reversing the ban, to legislative proposals prohibiting them altogether. This Article examines SEPs’ legality under existing law, focusing on claims that they violate the Miscellaneous Receipts Act and the Antideficiency Act. It begins with a brief history of SEPs’ policy evolution and the limitations on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s and U.S.
CEQ finalized its “Bipartisan Permitting Reform Implementation Rule” to revise its regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA.
EPA announced the availability of proposed interim registration review decisions and amended decisions for the following pesticides: Acephate, Captan, Ferbam, Thiram, and Ziram.
DOE revised its NEPA implementing procedures to add a categorical exclusion for certain energy storage systems and modify categorical exclusions for upgrading and rebuilding powerlines and for solar photovoltaic systems, as well as to make conforming changes to related sections of the Department’s NEPA regulations.