Search Results | Environmental Law Reporter®

89 FR 36729

SIP Proposal: California (revisions concerning emissions of volatile organic compounds from crude oil and natural gas facilities).

89 FR 36870

EPA proposed revisions to the preconstruction permitting regulations that apply to modifications at existing major stationary sources in the new source review program under the CAA.

United States v. French Limited, Inc., No. 4:89-cv-2544 (S.D. Tex. Apr. 26, 2024). A fourth modification to a 1990 consent decree under CERCLA concerning contamination at the French Limited Superfund Site near Crosby, Texas, revises work requirements, provides for the reimbursement to EPA of certain response costs, and provides for the disbursement to members of the working group of funds received by EPA in a bankruptcy settlement payment for the site.

89 FR 36833

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.

89 FR 35861

United States v. Dow Silicones Corp., No. 19-11880 (E.D. Mich. Apr. 24, 2024). A proposed consent decree modification extends a deadline for a settling CWA defendant’s implementation of a stormwater capacity and pollutant evaluation from January 24, 2023, to January 24, 2026, and also includes requirements to mitigate any environmental harm associated with the extension of the deadline.

89 FR 35717

EPA revised the water quality standards (WQS) regulation under the CWA to add requirements for states establishing WQS in waters where tribes hold and assert rights to CWA-protected aquatic and aquatic-dependent resources reserved through treaties, statutes, or executive orders.

Gathering Storm: SEC v. Jarkesy and Implications for Environmental Enforcement

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.

Clearing the Air on Supplemental Environmental Projects

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.

What Goes Around Should Come Around: Extended Producer Responsibility for Textiles

As marketers across the fashion industry increasingly tout “circularity” initiatives, the reality remains that exponentially more clothes are being produced, purchased, and promptly thrown away than ever before. This Comment focuses on governmental responses to the environmental crisis created by textile waste that promote circularity in the fashion industry through extended producer responsibility (EPR) regulation of textiles.

89 FR 35091

EPA entered into a proposed settlement agreement under the CAA in Nevada Cement Co., LLC v. EPA, Nos. 23-682 and 23-1098 (9th Cir.), that would establish a process and deadlines by which plaintiff would apply to EPA for a case-by-case emissions limit request for its Fernley, Nevada, facility, in exchange for agreeing to lift a judicial stay.