#D.C.] : U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Robert Reich's Substack:

Friends, For years, conservatives have railed against what they call the “administrative state” and denounced regulations. But let’s be clear. When they speak of the “administrative state,” they’re talking about agencies tasked with protecting the public from corporations that seek profits at the expense of the health, safety, and pocketbooks of average Americans. Regulations are the means by which agencies translate broad legal mandates into practical guardrails. Substitute the word “protection” for “regulation” and you get a more accurate picture of who has benefited — consumers, workers, and average people needing clean air and clean water. Substitute “corporate legal movement” for the “conservative legal movement” and you see who’s really mobilizing, and for what purpose.

**

[...] Last week, the Supreme Court made it much harder for the FTC, the Labor Department, and dozens of other agencies — ranging from the Environmental Protection Agency to the Food and Drug Administration, Securities and Exchange Commission, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and National Highway and Safety Administration — to protect Americans from corporate misconduct.

On Thursday, the six Republican-appointed justices eliminated the ability of these agencies to enforce their rules through in-house tribunals, rather than go through the far more costly and laborious process of suing corporations in federal courts before juries. On Friday, the justices overturned a 40-year-old precedent requiring courts to defer to the expertise of these agencies in interpreting the law, thereby opening the agencies to countless corporate lawsuits alleging that Congress did not authorize the agencies to go after specific corporate wrongdoing. In recent years, the court’s majority has also made it easier for corporations to sue agencies and get public protections overturned. The so-called “major questions doctrine” holds that judges should nullify regulations that have a significant impact on corporate profits if Congress was not sufficiently clear in authorizing them.

[...] In 1971, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, then a modest business group in Washington, D.C., asked Lewis Powell, then an attorney in Richmond, Virginia, to recommend actions corporations should take in response to the rising tide of public protections (that is, regulations). Powell’s memo — distributed widely to Chamber members — said corporations were “under broad attack” from consumer, labor, and environmental groups. In reality, these groups were doing nothing more than enforcing the implicit social contract that had emerged at the end of World War II, ensuring that corporations be responsive to all their stakeholders — not just shareholders but also their workers, consumers, and the environment.

[...] The so-called “conservative legal movement” of young lawyers who came of age working for Ronald Reagan — including Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. — were in reality part of this corporate legal movement. And they still are. Trump’s three appointments to the Supreme Court emerged from the same corporate legal movement. The next victory of the corporate legal movement will occur if and when the Supreme Court accepts a broad interpretation of the so-called “non-delegation doctrine.” Under this theory of the Constitution, the courts should not uphold any regulation in which Congress has delegated its lawmaking authority to agencies charged with protecting the public. If accepted by the court, this would mark the end of all regulations — that is, all public protections not expressly contained in statutes — and the final triumph of Lewis Powell’s vision.

Robert Reich wrote an interesting Substack piece on the history of the right-wing war on regulatory power that began with the infamous Powell Memo by Lewis Powell, and culminated with the recent Loper Bright Enterprises, Jarkesy, and Trump rulings.

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling Friday that overturned the landmark “Chevron doctrine” may give Wyoming an advantage when mounting court challenges for and against federal regulations and actions on issues ranging from wildlife and land management to energy development and industrial emissions.

Gov. Mark Gordon and Wyoming’s congressional delegation have hailed the ruling as a clear legal advantage in fighting federal agency actions they don’t like. But the ruling doesn’t necessarily hand Wyoming — or anybody else who sues federal agencies — a clear path to victory in court, according to several Wyoming and out-of-state observers.

Wyoming has much at stake. 48% of the land and 68% of the mineral estate are managed by the federal government and the Equality State has many active grievances against federal agencies now active in the courts. Since 2019, Gordon’s administration has initiated or participated in at least 57 lawsuits either challenging federal natural resources policies, or defending federal positions from litigation brought by public health and conservation groups, according to a list of lawsuits his office provided to WyoFile.

THE CHEVRON DOCTRINE

The Chevron doctrine, established by a 1984 Supreme Court ruling, instructed lower courts to defer to the expertise within agencies like the Bureau of Land Management, Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in their interpretation of carrying out laws passed by Congress. Those laws — like the Endangered Species Act and Clean Air Act — frequently do not reach into the weeds on scientific matters such as what qualifies as critical habitat or measuring ambient air quality, for example.

Under Chevron, deference to federal agencies’ interpretation wasn’t automatic, but applied when an agency attempted to reasonably interpret an ambiguous statute.

Now that the doctrine is overturned, courts may make their own interpretation of congressional intent. But that still won’t erase decades of case law, or statutory precedent, much of which is based on those agencies’ past interpretations and court actions, observers say.

“I think [courts are] going to struggle with it because they don’t have subject-matter expertise in these very intricate, technical aspects of the everyday life of an agency,” Sheridan-based landowner advocacy group Powder River Basin Resource Council Attorney Shannon Anderson said.

POLITICAL REACTION

Gordon, however, hailed what he described as a “victory for common-sense regulatory reform.”

“For years, unelected bureaucrats running federal agencies in Washington D.C. have used [Chevron] ‘deference’ as an excuse to target certain industries based on politics,” Gordon said in a prepared statement Friday. “Wyoming has experienced that firsthand. Limiting their power to overreach is cause for celebration, and this ruling begins that process.”

While not a party to the suit, Wyoming filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court case Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which was the basis for overturning the Chevron doctrine. Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyoming) and Rep. Harriet Hageman (R-Wyoming) also signed on to another amicus brief in the case.

“I applaud the Supreme Court’s decision to restore decision-making power back to democratically-elected members of Congress just as our Founding Fathers intended rather than allowing D.C. bureaucrats to rule with an iron fist,” Lummis said in a prepared statement.

“Today’s Supreme Court ruling is a major victory for getting Washington out of Wyoming,” Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyoming) said in a prepared statement. “For too long unelected, unaccountable Washington bureaucrats have gone unchecked.”

Other parties who’ve tracked efforts to overturn the Supreme Court’s 40-year-old precedent aren’t so sure that it’s a clear-cut victory for industry-aligned conservative western states like Wyoming that often rail against federal regulation.

A SMALLER VICTORY?

“I don’t think there’s been a lot of really deep thinking on their side about what [the loss of Chevron] actually means,” said Brett Hartl, an attorney who heads government relations for the Center for Biological Diversity. “They almost were captured by their own ideological premise more than factual reality.”

It’s possible, he said, that the court’s decision will ultimately have the effect of strengthening some environmental laws, though it could be “many years” before the true consequences are made clear.

“Some laws — like the Endangered Species Act — are actually very clear and very strong and have a very obvious meaning,” Hartl said. “Myself … and other organizations would actually argue that, if anything, the Fish and Wildlife Service has interpreted the [Endangered Species Act] weaker than what the law actually requires.”

As courts, instead of federal agencies, take more of a role interpreting environmental statutes, the strengths of the laws themselves may become more important, he said. To illustrate the point, Hartl compared the National Forest Management Act with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act. The former, which is considered a stronger law, governs U.S. Forest Service lands while the latter, perceived as weaker, has bearing on Bureau of Land Management property.

“So the loss of Chevron may make it easier to have protections for Forest Service lands than BLM lands,” Hartl said.

NO IMMEDIATE EFFECTS

Dessa Reimer, a Jackson-based attorney with Holland and Hart, does not foresee “immediate” on-the-ground changes in Wyoming stemming from the high court’s decision. The Chevron standard of review, she pointed out, does not necessarily implicate most federal agency permitting and decision making.

“For example, the Converse County Oil and Gas Project or Chokecherry Wind or the BLM’s Rock Springs RMP: Those aren’t notice-and-comment rulemaking, so when someone challenges those types of agency decisions, Chevron deference was not applied,” she said.

The immediate effect, Reimer believes, relates to how courts review agency rulemaking. “And there has been a slew of agency rulemaking under the Biden Administration coming out this year that’s already been challenged,” she said.

The BLM’s Public Lands Rule is one example. The measure, which puts land conservation on even footing with other land uses, has been targeted by Wyoming and Utah in a legal challenge.

Typically, federal agency rules and actions swing wildly between Democratic and Republican administrations: The EPA’s stance on regional haze and the BLM’s direction on federal coal leasing in the Powder River Basin are prime examples. But within the Supreme Court’s new ruling overturning the Chevron doctrine is the notion that courts might equalize those wild administrative swings in policy direction, according to University of Wyoming College of Law Professor Sam Kalen.

“What SCOTUS did say is, where there has been what’s called statutory precedent that had a court already affirming an interpretation, under a deference standard or not, the court said, ‘We’ll still likely give that stare decisis precedent,'” Kalen told WyoFile. “So it doesn’t automatically mean that all those old cases justify revisiting.”

A lot of litigants will try, however.

“I guarantee you that litigants are going to try to revisit a lot of cases now,” Kalen said. “The way I look at it is as a threat to the administrative state.”

[sedoretu]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/07/05/chevron-doctrine-overturned-regulations-vulnerable-supreme-court/

8 policies that could be vulnerable to new legal challenges [after Chevron]

The Supreme Court jettisoned longstanding precedent that helped the federal government make regulations. Now broad policies could be determined by judges.

“No policy is at greater risk than the administration’s student loan forgiveness efforts, which spend hundreds of billions of dollars without congressional authority,” said Michael Brickman, a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and a former senior adviser in the Education Department under President Donald Trump. Republican attorneys general in 18 states have sued to stop the Saving on a Valuable Education program, which lowers monthly student loan payments and offers a shorter path to loan forgiveness. They argue that Congress never envisioned anything as expansive as the program in the law underpinning the regulation.

...

A new Biden administration regulation protecting transgender students and laying out how schools must respond to accusations of sexual assault and harassment was already being challenged, and the new ruling gives opponents further ammunition to stop it. The regulation is the administration’s interpretation of the half-century-old Title IX law, which bars discrimination on the basis of sex in federally funded K-12 schools, colleges and universities. The administration, citing a 2020 Supreme Court ruling, included discrimination based on gender identity in its definition of sex discrimination, meaning schools might be required, for instance, to allow transgender students to use pronouns and bathrooms that align with their gender identity. The provision was celebrated by LGBTQ+ advocates and derided by conservatives.

...

The Supreme Court ruling almost immediately put a check on the Labor Department’s authority. Hours after the ruling came down Friday, a U.S. District Court judge in eastern Texas cited the decision in an order to block the federal overtime expansion from applying to Texas state employees. The rule went into effect Monday and makes millions more workers eligible for overtime pay nationwide. But labor and employment attorneys say the Texas judge’s decision signals that another court will probably block the rule.

... The Biden administration’s most consequential climate rule could be newly vulnerable: The Environmental Protection Agency’s plan to boost sales of electric vehicles while slashing emissions from gasoline-powered cars and trucks. Republican attorneys general from more than two dozen states had already sued the EPA over the Biden administration’s most consequential climate rule, a sweeping attempt to transform the U.S. auto market. The top trade association for the U.S. oil and gas industry, which could see demand for its products decline as consumers shift to EVs, has also challenged the regulations in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Opponents say the agency has overstepped its authority.

[plethoraworldatlas]

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management will have to reevaluate the wildlife and public health impacts of a major 2022 oil and gas lease sale in Wyoming after a federal judge ruled Friday that the agency had overlooked "what is widely regarded as the most pressing environmental threat facing the world today" when it moved forward with leasing 120,000 of federal land.

U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper ruled in Washington, D.C. that the BLM did not halt the lease sale even after it acknowledged that oil and gas drilling on the federal lands could result in the same negative environmental and social impacts as the addition of hundreds of thousands of cars to U.S. roads each year.

Moving forward with one of the Biden administration's largest lease sales despite its likely environmental harm, said Cooper, was illegal under the National Environmental Policy Act and other laws.

Representing The Wilderness Society and Friends of the Earth (FOE), environmental legal group Earthjustice sued BLM over its leasing plans' potential impact on the greater sage grouse, an endangered bird species, and other wildlife, as well as groundwater impacts.

The judge found BLM did not complete a sufficiently detailed review of drilling impacts on the greater sage grouse, and relied too heavily on outdated and overly broad analyses of oil and gas drilling in Wyoming.

[reasoningdaily]

The Associated Press: 22 attorneys general oppose 3M settlement over water systems contamination with 'forever chemicals'

TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. (AP) — Twenty-two attorneys general urged a federal court Wednesday to reject a proposed $10.3 billion settlement over contamination of U.S. public drinking water systems with potentially dangerous chemicals, saying it lets manufacturer 3M Co. off too easily.

The deal announced in June doesn’t give individual water suppliers enough time to determine how much money they would get and whether it would cover their costs of removing the compounds known collectively as PFAS, said the officials with 19 states, Washington, D.C., and two territories. In some cases the agreement could shift liability from the company to providers, they said.

“While I appreciate the effort that went into it, the proposed settlement in its current form does not adequately account for the pernicious damage that 3M has done in so many of our communities,” said California Attorney General Rob Bonta, leader of the multistate coalition.

3M spokesman Sean Lynch said the agreement “will benefit U.S.-based public water systems nationwide that provide drinking water to a vast majority of Americans” without further litigation.

“It is not unusual for there to be objections regarding significant settlement agreements,” Lynch said. “We will continue to work cooperatively to address questions about the terms of the resolution.”

The company, based in St. Paul, Minnesota, manufactures per- and polyfluorinated substances — a broad class of chemicals used in nonstick, water- and grease-resistant products such as clothing and cookware, as well as some firefighting foams.

Described as “forever chemicals” because they don’t degrade naturally in the environment, PFAS have been linked to a variety of health problems, including liver and immune-system damage and some cancers.

3M has said it plans to stop making them by the end of 2025.

Some 300 communities have sued 3M and other companies over water pollution from the compounds. A number of states, airports, firefighter training facilities and private well owners also have pending cases.

They have been consolidated in U.S. District Court in Charleston, South Carolina, where the proposed settlement was filed last month.

Although the company put its value at $10.3 billion, an attorney for the water providers said it could reach as high as $12.5 billion, depending on how many detect PFAS during testing the Environmental Protection Agency has ordered over the next three years.

The law firm representing the water providers did not immediately respond Wednesday to messages seeking comment.

EPA in March proposed strict limits on two common types, PFOA and PFOS, and said it wanted to regulate four others.

In addition to California, states urging Judge Richard Gergel to reject the deal included Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont and Wisconsin. Also opposed were Washington, D.C., Puerto Rico and the Northern Mariana Islands.

In a court filing, the attorneys general said it would force nearly all public water providers nationwide to participate unless they withdraw individually — even those that haven’t filed suits or tested for PFAS.

“Troublingly, they would have to make their opt-out decisions without knowing how much they would actually receive and, in many cases, before knowing the extent of contamination in their water supplies and the cost of remediating it,” the officials said in a statement.

A provision in the proposed deal would shift liability from 3M to water suppliers that don’t opt out, the statement said. That could enable the company to seek compensation from providers if sued over cancer or other illnesses in PFAS-affected communities, it said.

“As such, the proposed settlement is worth far less than the advertised $10.5 billion to $12.5 billion,” the attorneys general said.

The attorneys general did not take a position on a separate $1.18 billion deal to resolve PFAS complaints against DuPont de Nemours Inc. and spinoffs Chemours Co. and Corteva Inc.

[tsmom1219]

Federal judge rules EPA must publish more information about chemicals under review

Read the full story at The Hill. A Washington, D.C., judge ruled this week that the Environmental Protection Agency must disclose more information than it currently does about chemicals pending review under the Toxic Substances Control Act. In the ruling, Judge Loren AliKhan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, a President Biden appointee, sided with a coalition of…

[northiowatoday]

Feds warn of scammers sending fake EPA violation letter

Feds warn of scammers sending fake EPA violation letter

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Inspector General is issuing this fraud alert to highlight an increasingly common phishing scam involving fraudulent EPA Notice of Violation letters. In this scam, a fraudster sends a falsified EPA Notice of Violation letter to a target business and requests that the business respond by phone or email. In recent instances of…

[brookstonalmanac]

Events 6.22 (after 1940)

1940 – World War II: France is forced to sign the Second Compiègne armistice with Germany, in the same railroad car in which the Germans signed the Armistice in 1918. 1941 – World War II: Nazi Germany invades the Soviet Union in Operation Barbarossa. 1942 – World War II: Erwin Rommel is promoted to Field Marshal after the Axis capture of Tobruk. 1942 – The Pledge of Allegiance is formally adopted by U.S. Congress. 1944 – World War II: Opening day of the Soviet Union's Operation Bagration against the Army Group Centre. 1944 – U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt signs into law the Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944, commonly known as the G.I. Bill. 1945 – World War II: The Battle of Okinawa comes to an end with an American flag-raising ceremony. 1948 – The ship HMT Empire Windrush brought the first group of 802 West Indian immigrants to Tilbury, marking the start of modern immigration to the United Kingdom. 1948 – King George VI formally gives up the title "Emperor of India", half a year after Britain actually gave up its rule of India. 1962 – Air France Flight 117 crashes on approach to Pointe-à-Pitre International Airport in Guadeloupe, killing 112 people. 1965 – The Treaty on Basic Relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea is signed. 1966 – Vietnamese Buddhist activist leader Thích Trí Quang was arrested as the military junta of Nguyen Cao Ky crushed the Buddhist Uprising. 1969 – The Cuyahoga River catches fire in Cleveland, Ohio, drawing national attention to water pollution, and spurring the passing of the Clean Water Act and the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency. 1978 – Charon, the first of Pluto's satellites to be discovered, was first seen at the United States Naval Observatory by James W. Christy. 1979 – Former Liberal Party leader Jeremy Thorpe was acquitted of conspiracy to murder Norman Scott, who had accused Thorpe of having a relationship with him. 1984 – Virgin Atlantic launches with its first flight from London to Newark. 1986 – The famous Hand of God goal, scored by Diego Maradona in the quarter-finals of the 1986 FIFA World Cup match between Argentina and England, ignites controversy. This was later followed by the Goal of the Century. Argentina wins 2–1 and later goes on to win the World Cup. 1990 – Cold War: Checkpoint Charlie is dismantled in Berlin. 2000 – Wuhan Airlines Flight 343 is struck by lightning and crashes into Wuhan's Hanyang District, killing 49 people. 2002 – An earthquake measuring 6.5 Mw strikes a region of northwestern Iran killing at least 261 people and injuring 1,300 others and eventually causing widespread public anger due to the slow official response. 2009 – A Washington D.C Metro train traveling southbound near Fort Totten station collides into another train waiting to enter the station. Nine people are killed in the collision (eight passengers and the train operator) and at least 80 others are injured. 2012 – Paraguayan President Fernando Lugo is removed from office by impeachment and succeeded by Federico Franco. 2012 – A Turkish Air Force McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II fighter plane is shot down by the Syrian Armed Forces, killing both of the plane's pilots and worsening already-strained relations between Turkey and Syria. 2015 – The Afghan National Assembly building is attacked by gunmen after a suicide bombing. All six of the gunmen are killed and 18 people are injured. 2022 – An earthquake occurs in eastern Afghanistan resulting in over 1,000 deaths.

[theenergyconnection]

The American Petroleum Institute (API) filed a lawsuit in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals challenging the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) heavy-duty (HD) vehicle emissions standards for model years (MY) 2027-2032.

[mongowheelie]

Feds erred in transferring wetlands permitting to FL agency, U.S. judge rules - Florida Phoenix

[conchapman]

EPA Adds Lounge Lizard to Endangered Species List

WASHINGTON, D.C.  The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency yesterday placed the lounge lizard, one of nine species of squamate reptiles native to the United States, on its endangered species list. “Want to hear my Wayne Newton imitation?” The notice in the Federal Register cited a sharp drop-off in lounge lizard populations since 2017, when singer Buddy Greco died.  “Buddy was the ultimate…

[mariacallous]

The United States has a distinct opportunity to lead the world in rapid phase-down of a major climate pollutant, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) that pack an intensive short-term climate punch and are used widely in cooling systems such as air conditioning and refrigeration. In recent years, America has demonstrated leadership in technological development of climate-friendly alternatives and mustered broad political support to accelerate the HFC transition. This included bipartisan backing of 2020 legislation followed by overwhelming U.S. Senate support for a binding global treaty two years later.

The treaty, the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol on ozone-depleting substances, has been embraced by 150 nations—the latest extension of the most successful global environmental regime of the past half-century. Federal agencies have moved rapidly on implementation, issuing rules designed to achieve an 85% reduction in HFC production and use by the mid-2030s and launching a multi-agency task force to combat smuggling. Everything appeared to be in place for an exceptionally large global climate victory backed by a wide range of industries and governments led by the U.S.

There may, however, be one big catch. HFCs are easy to conceal in small containers, as Europe has experienced amid expanding smuggling activity. A federal court has now ruled that federal agencies lack the authority to combat smuggling by banning disposable containers for transporting coolant chemicals or deploying QR tracking codes to monitor their whereabouts.

Overshadowed by a flurry of recent high-profile Supreme Court rulings is a less salient but notable case from the D.C. Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals. It upholds Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) plans to address various HFC blends and allocate allowances through a cap-and-trade program in implementing the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act (AIM). But a majority opinion written by Judge Justin Walker (a Trump appointee) contends that “nowhere does the Act say anything about QR codes or refillable cylinders.” As a result, two linchpins in federal efforts to deter HFC smuggling have been removed, raising significant questions about AIM and Kigali implementation.

The Walker opinion, supported by Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson (a G.H.W. Bush appointee), focuses on the lack of specific statutory reference to the technologies in question. It views HFC regulation exclusively in domestic policy terms, making no reference to Kigali or cross-border smuggling. It defines AIM provisions that EPA “shall ensure” compliance very narrowly, describing its phase-down schedule as “a math equation, not a grant of regulatory power.”

In a partial dissent, Judge Nina Pillard (an Obama appointee), offers a profoundly different view. She characterizes the cannister and code provisions as examples of appropriate agency interpretation of statute. Pillard reviews Kigali and cross-border trade in cooling chemicals as well as EPAs lengthy history in setting container and labeling requirements for such substances as pesticides and biofuels. The majority opinion “will hamstring EPA’s efforts to combat illicit trade in HFCs,” she writes, “making it less likely that the United States accomplishes the HFC reductions Congress mandated.”

This case did not rise to “major question” status, but nonetheless demonstrates the far-reaching capacity of federal courts to block agency interpretation of statutes. The rejected provisions could possibly be restored through separate rules under development, although that would likely face further judicial scrutiny. Congress also could rewrite the AIM Act to specify its views more precisely on container and code use, but legislative revision of existing environmental law has been extremely rare for decades. With a divided Congress, passing a new bill through both the House and the Senate would be challenging.

What appears more likely is that the U.S. may squander an opportunity to lead globally on reducing releases of a major climate contaminant, despite a process that navigated the political gauntlet and yielded a remarkably brief but clear piece of legislation and then broad treaty support. The European Union and other early actors are intensifying their own efforts to deter smuggling, including border seizures, customs agent scanning, and refillable container bans, sustaining early leadership while the U.S. sorts things out.

There are also potential challenges ahead for American manufacturers of HFC alternatives, including expanded competitive risks from illegally produced HFCs. Failure to establish a viable international system will have clear climate consequences in a world in which 10 new air conditioners are purchased globally every second. Full, international Kigali implementation would reduce global temperatures 0.5 degrees Celsius by the end of this century, a cornerstone in climate protection.

This case may foreshadow further judicial micro-management of agency efforts to interpret statutes, including future cases where technology is emerging to achieve significant environmental and climate gains. Like HFCs, methane is also a major short-lived climate pollutant for which the United States appears poised to accelerate mitigation. However, opportunities to take advantage of rapid technological advances to monitor releases precisely from satellites, planes, and drones or to capture gases before release could be undermined if Congress fails to specify in painstaking detail its views on the roles of such technologies in legislation.

The decision also underscores the imperative to restore the U.S. Office of Technology Assessment (OTA). As my Brookings colleague Darrell West has noted, OTAs demise in the 1990s has impaired congressional capacity to understand and address a wide range of technology-related issues. If Congress must spell out in legislation detailed rationales and instructions for federal agencies to deploy single use cannisters and QR codes for cooling sector chemicals, we may be entering a new era whereby the legislative branch will need to markedly expand its technological expertise if future legislation is to survive judicial muster and be effective. OTA restoration could begin to bolster congressional capacity to assume such responsibilities.

[noisynutcrusade]

Joe Manchin vows to block “radical climate agenda,” rakes in oil and gas industry contributions • OpenSecrets

U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.V.), Chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, during a hearing on May 2, 2023 in Washington, D.C (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images) The Environmental Protection Agency unveiled a new proposal Thursday to cut greenhouse gas emissions from thousands of power plants burning coal or natural gas, two of the top sources of electricity across the…

[gjupdates]

U.S. orders Norfolk Southern to clean up 'mess' from Ohio train chemical spill

[ad_1] © Reuters. FILE PHOTO: Signage is seen at the headquarters of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in Washington, D.C., U.S., May 10, 2021. REUTERS/Andrew Kelly By Valerie Volcovici and Brad Brooks WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The head of the U.S. government’s environmental agency said on Tuesday that rail operator Norfolk Southern Corp (NYSE:) must “pay for cleaning up the…

[moneygigs]

U.S. orders Norfolk Southern to clean up 'mess' from Ohio train chemical spill

© Reuters. FILE PHOTO: Signage is seen at the headquarters of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in Washington, D.C., U.S., May 10, 2021. REUTERS/Andrew Kelly By Valerie Volcovici and Brad Brooks WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The head of the U.S. government’s environmental agency said on Tuesday that rail operator Norfolk Southern Corp (NYSE:) must “pay for cleaning up the mess”…