Consistent with President Trump’s February 28, 2017 Executive Order, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) announced a joint proposal representing the first step of a two-part plan to implement a more narrow “waters of the U.S.” or “WOTUS” definition. The first step, published in the Federal Register on July 27, 2017, seeks to repeal the 2015 WOTUS rule, and replace prior rules. Continue Reading
Environmental regulatory reform under the Trump Administration presents an opportunity to reinvigorate the national conversation around the federal-state relationship. Continue Reading
For the past several months, Monsanto has been in court challenging California’s decision to add the chemical glyphosate—the active ingredient in its herbicide Roundup—to the Proposition 65 list. It recently faced a setback when the California Supreme Court rejected Monsanto’s request to stay a lower court’s decision to include glyphosate among the 960 chemicals on the list. California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) wasted no time after the decision and added glyphosate to the list on July 7, 2017. Continue Reading
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit recently overturned a lower court’s order for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to conduct a study of air pollution rules’ impact on jobs, and it has broad ramifications across industries.
The Fourth Circuit’s ruling in Murray Energy Corp. v. Adm’r EPA may impact the scope of citizen suits under the Clean Air Act (CAA) and other statutes, including environmental activism cases with the potential to expose companies to significant liabilities. In addition, the EPA’s future rulemaking is likely to continue to have significant implications for industry jobs. Continue Reading
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia recently denied the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposed delay of an Obama-era rule that limits methane emissions from new oil and gas equipment, sending oil and gas companies scrambling to immediately ensure compliance with the rule to avoid any enforcement actions. Continue Reading
On the one year anniversary of major amendments to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued three new “framework” rules on how it plans to prioritize and evaluate risks from new chemicals or new uses of chemicals — offering clearer guidance to manufacturers on how chemicals will be evaluated and regulated. Continue Reading
One day before the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, ExxonMobil shareholders overwhelmingly voted to require increased attention to and disclosure of the future impact of climate change on business expectations, while Chevron’s shareholders defeated similar proposals. Continue Reading
In a break with long-standing policy, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt has taken back authority to approve remedies costing $50 million or more at Superfund sites effective immediately. According to the delegation of authority memo issued on May 9, 2017, the purpose of these revisions is to promote accountability and consistency in the remedy selection process and encourage speedier remediation and revitalization of contaminated sites. Continue Reading
As the Trump-era Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) continues the process of reconsidering Obama-era decisions, we have seen a flurry of EPA-requested stays on ongoing litigation related to rules and decisions from the prior administration. The courts have generally been willing to grant these motions, issuing 60, 90, or 120-day stays for most cases. Continue Reading
As President Trump’s administration attempts to dismantle President Obama’s Climate Action Plan, one action may be removing funding from the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) for enforcement of the 2010 Commission Guidance Regarding Disclosure Related to Climate Change. So, should public companies continue to disclose climate change-driven risks and benefits?
Yes – according to the SEC, the climate change disclosure guidance merely “assists companies in satisfying” their pre-existing requirements concerning disclosure of environmental issues, affirming disclosure obligations in place since the 1970s. By following the guidance, companies merely will be supplying information about climate change that may impact investors’ decision-making. Continue Reading