Many speculated on just how much Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (Loper Bright) would affect agency rulemaking challenges. Well, the D.C. Circuit is showing that that effect maybe milder than expected. Huntsman Petrochemical, the American Chemistry Council, and the Louisiana Chemical Association (Petitioners) tested how a post-Chevron world could look under judicial
Supreme Court 2024: Key Rulings Reshape Federal Regulatory Authority
As the Supreme Court’s recent term drew to a close, the Court issued four opinions that promise to reshape the federal regulatory landscape. These decisions—Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Ohio v. EPA, and SEC v. Jarkesy—both individually, and
Ohio v. EPA: SCOTUS Issues Stay in EPA’s Multi-State Air FIP
Stoel Rives Summer Associate Jessica Wright co-authored this post.
We want to bring to your attention a recent development involving the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) regulation of air pollutants. In the case Ohio v. EPA, the Supreme Court issued a stay on the enforcement of the EPA’s Federal Implementation Plan (FIP), halting the EPA’s ability
SCOTUS Speaks: Agency Deference is Out, Judicial Independence is In
Executive Summary
The decision by the United States Supreme Court (“SCOTUS”) on June 28, 2024, in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, 603 U. S. ____ (2024) (“Loper”) reads simply: “The Administrative Procedure Act requires courts to exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority, and courts may not defer to an agency interpretation of the law simply because a statute is ambiguous; Chevron is overruled.”[1] Chevron cannot be reconciled with the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) by presuming that statutory ambiguities are implicit delegations to agencies. Chevron was decided in 1984. The APA was adopted in 1946.
Moving forward, courts are no longer required to defer to a federal agency’s interpretation of the federal statute it administers when that statute is silent or ambiguous, unless the statute expressly grants discretionary authority to the federal agency. The Court’s ruling will only apply moving forward and prior cases decided using the Chevron doctrine will not be affected by the Court’s ruling.Continue Reading SCOTUS Speaks: Agency Deference is Out, Judicial Independence is In
I must be missing something… CEQ’s Playbook for EJ Strategic Plans
Originally posted by the American College of Environmental Lawyers, November 9, 2023.
On November 3, 2023, the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) released a playbook for federal agencies to develop their Environmental Justice Strategic Plans, Strategic Planning to Advance Environmental Justice. This tool provides a ‘how to guide’ for federal agencies working
California’s New Climate-Related Disclosure Laws
California has enacted two new laws on corporate disclosure of direct and indirect greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and climate-related financial risks. Senate Bill (SB) 253, the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act, expands state GHG emissions reporting requirements to large U.S. companies doing business in California. SB 261 requires biennial disclosure of climate-related financial risks.Continue Reading California’s New Climate-Related Disclosure Laws
Phase 2 NEPA Revisions: Significant Changes Proposed by CEQ in the Proposed Bipartisan Permitting Reform Rule
Introduction
On July 31, 2023, the Council on Environmental Quality (“CEQ”) proposed the Bipartisan Permitting Reform Implementation Rule (“Proposed Rule”), 88 Fed. Reg. 49,924 (July 31, 2023), which is better known as Phase 2 of the Biden Administration’s revisions to the regulations that implement the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”).
NEPA imposes a procedural requirement that does not mandate outcomes, only informed decision making. Despite its procedural nature, NEPA is one of the primary mechanisms for project opponents to challenge projects and is the most litigated federal statute. CEQ describes the changes in the Proposed Rule as promoting efficient and effective environmental review while increasing regulatory certainty. Given the history of NEPA litigation, and the significant changes in the Proposed Rule, it is likely that these changes will open new pathways for litigation and require courts to interpret the changes before providing regulatory certainty.
Background Leading to the Proposed Rule
Prior to 2020, the regulations implementing NEPA, 40 C.F.R. §§ 1500-1508, had not been meaningfully updated since 1978. In 2020, CEQ finalized significant changes to the regulations, which were designed to speed up project review and limit agency discretion in considering impacts beyond the immediately proposed project. In 2021 CEQ started a phased process to revise the NEPA regulations. In April 2022, CEQ issued its Phase I Rule, 87 Fed. Reg. 23,453 (April 20, 2022), which restored the 1978 regulations’ provisions on the purpose and need statement, defined “effects of the action,” and restored agency discretion to adopt procedures beyond those contained in the CEQ regulations.Continue Reading Phase 2 NEPA Revisions: Significant Changes Proposed by CEQ in the Proposed Bipartisan Permitting Reform Rule
Minnesota Enacts Sweeping PFAS Restrictions
On May 24, 2023, Minnesota became the latest state to impose significant restrictions on perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) when Governor Tim Walz signed HF 2310. In this blog post, we examine some of the critical questions surrounding the new law.
What does the new law do?
Headlining the new law is a ban on the sale, offer for sale, or distribution for sale of certain products that contain intentionally added PFAS. This ban will be rolled out in two stages. Initially, beginning on January 1, 2025, a person may not sell, offer for sale, or distribute for sale any of the following products if the product contains intentionally added PFAS:
- carpets or rugs;
- cleaning products;
- cookware;
- cosmetics;
- dental floss;
- fabric treatments;
- juvenile products;
- menstruation products;
- textile furnishings;
- ski wax; and
- upholstered furniture.
The commissioner of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) may by rule identify additional products by category or use.
The second phase of the ban beginning on January 1, 2032 is a total prohibition on the sale, offer for sale, or distribution for sale of any product that contains intentionally added PFAS. A product or category of product can be excepted from this ban if the commissioner determines that the use of PFAS is a currently unavoidable use, although the commissioner may not make such a determination for a product that is included in the initial ban discussed above.Continue Reading Minnesota Enacts Sweeping PFAS Restrictions
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL UPDATE – NEW AIR QUALITY AND OIL & GAS REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS
This is a continuing series of posts on the latest environmental and legal developments affecting oil and gas operations and development and other industries in Los Angeles and adjacent counties, as well as the southern San Joaquin Valley. In this post, we provide an update on regulatory developments at the California Air Resources Board, the California Geologic Energy Management Division, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the South Coast Air Quality Management District.
STATE AGENCIES
California Air Resources Board (CARB)
CARB’s ongoing regulatory actions affect industry generally and are focused more heavily on the oil and gas industry. Actions potentially affecting all industries include the AB 617 program, termed by CARB as the Community Air Protection Program, CRT, an evolving regulation requiring substantially increased reporting of both criteria and toxic air emissions and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, calculating carbon intensity based on Stanford’s OPGEE model.
AB 617, CARB’s Community Air Protection Program (CAPP): CARB’s CAPP action under AB 617, implements Assembly Member Cristina Garcia’s 2017 bill, requiring CARB to identify annually communities that they find impacted by disproportionate air emissions. These communities then assemble Community Steering Committees, and the local air districts must work with these Committees to develop Community Emission Reduction Plans (CERPs). For more background on AB 617 implementation by CARB and the local air district, see Stoel’s California Environmental blogs for October 4, 2019 and May 11, 2018.
Continue Reading SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL UPDATE – NEW AIR QUALITY AND OIL & GAS REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS
CDFW Proposes New Regulations for Oil Spill Management Team Certification with a September 14 Comment Deadline
Last week, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (“CDFW”) Office of Spill Prevention and Response (“OSPR”) issued notice that it proposes to add ten new regulations (sections 830.1 through 830.11 to Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations) to implement statutory changes resulting from Assembly Bill (“AB”) 1197. AB 1197 establishes criteria and a process for the certification of oil spill management teams.
Continue Reading CDFW Proposes New Regulations for Oil Spill Management Team Certification with a September 14 Comment Deadline
CDFW Moves Notifications for Lake and Streambed Alteration Standard Agreements Online
Last month, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (“CDFW”) issued notice that it will begin accepting electronic notifications for all Lake and Streambed Alteration Standard Agreements (Cal. Fish & Game Code § 1600 et seq.) effective August 1, 2020. This move to online applications is part of a broader effort by CDFW to go