Power Plants Environmental Protection Agency

News & Analysis as of

EPA Ordered to Revise CSAPR Emissions Budgets

On July 28, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ordered the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to revise emissions budgets for several states under the agency’s Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR or the...more

Top 6 at 6 - Climate Change Legal Highlights of the First Six Months of 2015

Some might say that the Clean Power Plan is all one needs to talk about in any highlights article on recent climate change legal issues. When final the CPP will expand the scope of the Clean Air Act profoundly, impact the...more

Changes Likely in Final Version of EPA's Clean Power Plan

EPA's rules regulating greenhouse gas emissions from power plants are expected to be finalized by the end of the summer. It has been nearly two years since the EPA unveiled its proposed greenhouse gas emissions standards...more

Environmental Notes - July 2015

Clean Water Rule Opens Litigation Floodgates - With much fanfare, EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps”) recently issued a final rule clarifying which bodies of water are “waters of the United States” protected...more

Tenth Circuit Rejects Constitutional Challenge to Colorado’s Renewable Energy Mandate

On July 13, the Tenth Circuit upheld Colorado’s renewable energy mandate against a claim that it impermissibly interferes with interstate commerce. This decision, addressing a state’s power to encourage or require the...more

Supreme Court Rejects EPA Mercury Emissions Rule

On June 29, 2015, the Supreme Court cast serious doubt upon the future of the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (“MATS”) by finding that the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) failed to adequately consider the costs of...more

EPA Must Consider Costs in Deciding Whether to Regulate HAPs From Power Plants

Last week, in Michigan v. EPA, the U.S. Supreme Court held that it was unreasonable for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) to refuse to consider costs in connection with its finding that it was “appropriate and...more

Supreme Court Ruling on EPA Mercury Rule: Utilities Wins the Battle, But Lose the War

The Clean Air Act requires EPA to regulate emissions of hazardous air pollutants from coal-fired power plants if the agency determines that such “regulation is appropriate and necessary” after studying the hazards the...more

MATS attack: Supreme Court reversal of EPA's Air Toxics Rule signals difficulties ahead

On June 29, 2015, the US Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, reversed and remanded to the DC Circuit EPA's Mercury and Air Toxics Standards rule (MATS). Michigan v. EPA, No. 14-46. MATS is a signature regulation of the Obama...more

The U.S. Supreme Court Holds EPA Must Consider Costs in Deciding to Regulate Power Plants

The U.S. Supreme Court’s June 29th decision in Michigan v. EPA, taken together with another significant CAA opinion from last term, Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, demonstrates the Court’s proclivity for subjecting...more

Back to the Drawing Board: Supreme Court Sets Aside EPA Regulations On Mercury Emissions from Power Plants

The Supreme Court on Monday dealt a setback to the Environmental Protection Agency’s regulation limiting mercury and other toxic emissions from power plants – the “mercury rule.” In Michigan v. Environmental Protection...more

California Environmental Law & Policy Update - July 2015

Environmental and Policy Focus - BP pays record $18.7 billion to settle claims in Gulf oil spill Bloomberg - Jul 2: BP Plc reached a record $18.7 billion agreement to settle all federal and state claims from the 2010...more

Supreme Court Strikes Down EPA’s Mercury and Air Toxics Standard

Delivering a sharp blow to President Obama’s efforts to regulate coal plants, the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) 2012 Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) rule, finding that...more

Supreme Court Halts Implementation of EPA Rule on Mercury Emissions from Electric Power Plants: The Practical Effects Are...

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court halted further implementation of a U.S. EPA’s regulation limiting mercury and other hazardous air toxic emissions from coal- and oil-fired electric power plants. In a 5-4 decision, the...more

Because EPA Failed to Consider Costs to Industry, Supreme Court Overturns Power Plant Regulation

The Mercury and Air Toxics Standards rule ("MATS") for electric utility steam generating units has been reversed and remanded with the Supreme Court’s much-anticipated decision in Michigan v. EPA on June 29, 2015. Writing for...more

Supreme Court Decision Could Limit EPA's Authority Over Greenhouse Gas Emissions

On June 29, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court delivered another warning to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) against overstepping its statutory authority under the Clean Air Act. In Michigan v. Environmental Protection...more

Supreme Court Rejects EPA's Rule Regulating Hazardous Air Polluntants from Power Plants

On June 29, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was wrong not to consider the cost of compliance when it decided to regulate mercury and other air toxic substances emitted from power...more

The U.S. Supreme Court Invalidates EPA's Power Plant Mercury Emissions Regulation

On June 29, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court in Michigan v. Environmental Protection Agency invalidated the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Mercury and Toxic Air Standards (MATS) regulation by a 5 to 4 vote, finding that...more

Supreme Court rules on EPA power plant regulations

The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency acted unreasonably in developing new regulations on hazardous air emissions from power plants without considering the cost impact...more

"Capacious" Term Dooms MATS Rule - Does It Say Anything About the Clean Power Plan?

The Energy Information Agency predicted the retirement of up to 60 gigawatts of coal-fired electricity generation by 2020. A significant contributor to that evolution was the Mercury and Air Toxics Standard or MATS Rule. ...more

Considerable Costs—Supreme Court Requires EPA to Consider Cost Impacts of Power Plant Toxic Emissions Rules

A closely divided Supreme Court has determined that EPA must consider cost when regulating emissions of hazardous air pollutants from stationary sources. Under the Clean Air Act, EPA has authority to regulate toxic emissions...more

Supreme Court Rejects EPA Rulemaking Process for Power Plant Emissions Standards

The US Supreme Court held yesterday that the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) unreasonably failed to consider costs when it made the initial decision to regulate emissions of hazardous air pollutants from power...more

US Supreme Court Nixes EPA Regulations on Mercury Emissions – Must Consider Costs Early!

In Michigan v. EPA, the U. S. Supreme Court invalidated EPA’s rules limiting emissions of mercury and other pollutants from power plants, ruling that EPA inappropriately ignored the costs of regulation – particularly...more

Supreme Court Overturns EPA Limits on Power Plants

On June 29, the United States Supreme Court nixed the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s 2012 Mercury and Air Toxics Standard, limiting emissions of mercury and other pollutants from power plants. The challengers...more

Supreme Court: EPA Must Consider Cost Of Implementing Regulations

In a 5-4 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court today ruled that the EPA acted unreasonably when it refused to consider the cost of implementing its Mercury and Air Toxics Standard (MATS). The MATS rule, issued in 2012,...more

182 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 8

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×