We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 225

Mississippi v. EPA: support of the Clean Air Science Advisory Committee is not necessary to affirm EPA’s NAAQS
  • Foley Hoag LLP
  • USA
  • July 24 2013

On Tuesday, in Mississippi v. EPA, the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit affirmed EPA's 2008 NAAQS for ozone of 0.075 ppm. However, it remanded


Weighing the costs and benefits of cost-benefit analysis
  • Foley Hoag LLP
  • USA
  • April 8 2013

I have previously posted about Cass Sunstein's efforts to bring cost-benefit analysis to government regulation. On Friday, E&E News reported on


EPA defends the biomass deferral rule -- it feels more like Rube Goldberg every day
  • Foley Hoag LLP
  • USA
  • May 17 2012

On Tuesday, EPA filed its brief in support of its rule deferring regulation of GHG emissions from biomass facilities until 2014


Conventional pollution is still where it's at: EPA releases the power plant MACT rule
  • Foley Hoag LLP
  • USA
  • March 18 2011

If anyone had any doubts about the significance of the conventional pollutant regulations that EPA would be rolling out, even in the absence of a full cap-and-trade program for GHG, Wednesday's release of EPA's revised power plant MACT proposal should go a long way towards eliminating those doubts


Democracy in action: environmental legislation edition
  • Foley Hoag LLP
  • USA
  • November 11 2011

What follows is the full text of Bill S.325, introduced in the Massachusetts legislature this term


Important decision; no surprise -- the Supreme Court bars federal climate change nuisance claims
  • Foley Hoag LLP
  • USA
  • June 21 2011

Yesterday, the Supreme Court announced its decision in American Electric Power v. Connecticut, holding that EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act displaced federal common law nuisance claims


EPA splits the baby on backup generators: still allows 100 hours use, but now requires ultra low sulfur diesel
  • Foley Hoag LLP
  • USA
  • January 16 2013

Yesterday, EPA finalized revisions to the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for stationary reciprocating internal combustion


Due process? We don't need no stinkin' due process.
  • Foley Hoag LLP
  • USA
  • June 1 2010

Last Friday, the Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit issued an order - boggling the minds of lawyers and non-lawyers alike - dismissing the plaintiffs' appeal in Comer v Murphy Oil, one of the climate change nuisance cases


Is EPA considering allowing PCB cleanups to proceed under RCRA, rather than TSCA? I'll believe it when I see it (and I hope I see it)
  • Foley Hoag LLP
  • USA
  • October 22 2012

One headline in today’s Daily Environment Report stated that “EPA Considers PCB Regulatory Reform Amid State Regulator Criticism of Program”


Which is worse? EPA oversight or citizen oversight?
  • Foley Hoag LLP
  • USA
  • June 10 2013

Everyone who represents PRPs in Superfund settlements has his or her own horror stories regarding the scope of EPA's oversight cost claims. We all