The California Air Resources Board just released the results of its second auction of GHG allowances.

The chaos unleashed by Aviall continues in a recent decision by the Seventh Circuit.

Site owners who conduct environmental investigations of potential releases of hazardous substances in the expectation that they will be able to recover their costs from the party whose operations gave rise to that threatened release may be surprised by the outcome in a recent federal district case in Georgia, Stratford Holding, LLC v. Fog Cap Retail Investors LLC.

United States v. Sterling Centrecorp, Inc., is a great feast of legal argument.

Although one might not ordinarily think to associate child pornography and pollution, the two were linked at an oral argument yesterday before the United States Supreme Court.

Deciding statute of limitations issues in CERCLA cases is not always a straightforward matter as the recent 54 page opinion in American Premier Underwriters Inc. v. General Electric Company illustrates.

Some decisions are valuable not because they make new law but because they reaffirm well known principles of law.

Earlier this week, Greenwire noted a Los Angeles Times story reporting that businesses are using the California Environmental Quality Act – California’s version of NEPA – as a tool of economic competition, trying to kill or delay projects for economic reasons. Much like Claude Rains,

Yesterday, Greenwire reported about speculation regarding what impact EPA’s proposed New Source Performance Standards for greenhouses gases would have on potential regulation of existing sources.

According to Greenwire (subscription required), EPA has acknowledged that it possesses no records providing a factual basis for claims made by Scott Pruitt

I do not want to suggest that most environmentalists are Luddites or that the environmental movement is opposed to economic development.

Although courts are sometimes reluctant to enforce them, there really are hard stops in CERCLA, particularly the three year statute of limitations for recovery of costs incurred in a removal action.

The old warning that "past performance is no guarantee of future results" apparently applies not only to investments but also to environmental nuisance suits in Tennessee.

Last week, EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers promulgated the final rule repealing the 2015 rule defining the Waters of the United States

Late last week, Greenwire reported that EPA is delaying its proposed construction general permit, or CGP, for stormwater.

Those following stormwater issues know that EPA is overdue to promulgate a proposed rule for stormwater controls at post-construction sites.

I hope that I am not struck down for saying this, but EPA's guidance on doing remedial work during the COVID-19 emergency is reasonable and appropriate. At the risk of oversimplifying, it basically has two requirements...

Anyone who reads this blog must have seen the explosion of reports in the trade press that EPA ignored significant criticism from the Army Corps of Engineers in promulgating its Waters of the US rule.

On Friday, EPA released "Step 3" of the GHG Tailoring Rule. The big news is no news at all. EPA left the GHG permitting thresholds unchanged, at 100,000 tons per year of carbon dioxide equivalent for new facilities and increases of 75,000 tpy of CO2e for existing facilities.

Last week, EPA released its report on Enforcement Annual Results in EPA Regions for Fiscal Year 2014.