Blogs | Environmental and Energy Law Solutions

A proposed rule issued August 9^th appears to move in a different direction from the approach to cooperative federalism promoted by recent EPA initiatives.  EPA’s new Water Quality Certification rule seeks to restrict the authority of states and authorized tribal agencies – at least with respect to certain actions under the Clean Water Act. This is a rule to watch for utilities and businesses seeking licenses from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and for developers who need Clean Water Act Section 404 permits from the Army Corps of Engineers.

Case of First Impression Overturns Mined Land Reclamation Board Ruling

On July 25, 2019, the Colorado Court of Appeals reversed a ruling of the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board (“MLRB” or “agency”) which had authorized a second period of temporary cessation for a uranium mine.  The Court in Information Network for Responsible Mining, Earthworks, and Sheep Mountain Alliance v. Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board was asked to determine if the agency properly authorized a “second period of temporary cessation” which would allow the mining permit issued by the MLRB to remain in effect.

Continuing its focus on cooperative federalism under the current Administration, EPA issued its final policy on Enhancing Effective Partnerships Between the EPA and the States in Civil Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Work on July 11, 2019.  EPA’s guidance memorandum follows review of comments from the draft policy published in May 2019 and replaces the January 2018 interim guidance on enhancing partnerships.  EPA’s final policy expands and clarifies earlier direction on communication planning between EPA and its state counterparts with authorized or delegated programs under various federal statutes such as the federal Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, and RCRA.

Facilities that own and operate air emissions sources in the State of Missouri, such as manufacturing plants, chemical plants, and similar industrial air sources, will want to take note of recent proposed changes to the notification obligations involving certain excess emission events.

After years of studies, Congressional pressure, and on-the-ground experience with the American Burying Beetle, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposed downgrading the beetle’s status from “Endangered” to “Threatened.” In addition to this move, Fish and Wildlife has proposed a rule that would tailor protections that are necessary for the beetle to recover under section 4(d) of the Endangered Species Act.

The Department of the Interior recently announced six new Records of Decision that amend Resource Management Plans for the Greater Sage-Grouse.

Mitigation bank credits may become more readily available to builders, developers and other permittees following new guidance issued in late February.  The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers issued Regulatory Guidance Letter 19-01, developed in collaboration with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, on February 22, 2019. (Available here)

Lenders, borrowers, purchasers, sellers, and even contractors sometimes get annoyed with environmental lawyers when we insist on reviewing Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) draft reports, looking at the underlying regulatory files, checking title reports, real property records, and contract terms, counting days to make sure that the Phase I report is not stale or expired at closing, and documenting which parties do, should, or do not have reliance rights under that report.   

On January 23, 2019, Wildgrass Oil and Gas Committee (reportedly an anti-fracking group but also an organization that includes mineral owners in the Wildgrass subdivision in Broomfield, Colorado), filed suit in federal court in Denver challenging, on federal constitutional grounds, that portion of the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Act (C.R.S. 34-60-116) (the “Act”) that allows the Commission to “force pool” the development of oil and gas resources.

There are several online resources available to track the regulatory activities of the current federal administration, including various federal government agency websites.  The two sites which I and others often turn to for comprehensive and easy-to-use online access for tracking the current state of federal deregulatory efforts are the sites produced and maintained by the law schools at Harvard College and New York University.

In a unanimous decision which resolved more than five years of dispute, the Colorado Supreme Court on January 14, 2019 upheld the decision of the Colorado Oil and Gas Commission (COGCC) which had refused to engage in rulemaking proposed by environmental groups. Led by the so-called teenage activist Xiuhtezcatl (pronounced Shoe-Tez-Caht) Martinez, the activists proposed a rule that would have conditioned all new oil and gas development on a finding of no cumulative adverse impacts to public health and the environment.  Responding to the rulemaking petition which was originally submitted in 2013, the COGCC said the rulemaking was beyond its statutory authority; on appeal, the district court agreed with the agency; and then the Court of Appeals, in a split decision, reversed. 

On August 16, the Colorado Air Quality Control Commission set a hearing to consider establishing a new Regulation Number 20 to adopt specific provisions of the California low emission vehicle (LEV) rule for model year 2022 and newer light and medium duty vehicles. The Division’s proposed rule will not include a Zero Emissions Vehicle (ZEV) mandate and has no impact on heavy-duty vehicles or non-road (construction and agricultural) equipment.

As someone who frequently helps businesses buy and sell commercial and industrial properties, I frequently encounter misunderstandings about Phase I Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs) and their role in a property transaction. Although not an exhaustive list, these 10 items are among the most important you should know about for your next property transaction.

A recent analysis by the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (“COGCC”) shows that increasing the current regulatory setback of 500 feet to the 2500-foot setback proposed in Initiative # 97 would prevent oil and gas development on 85% of the non-federal land surface in the state. 

On Wednesday, July 18, 2018, Governor Hickenlooper of Colorado issued an Executive Order directing the Colorado Oil and Gas Commission (COGCC) to act to “plug, remediate, and reclaim” orphaned oil and gas wells and sites.  Of the over 50,000 oil and gas wells in the state, the COGCC is currently tracking 262 orphaned wells and 373 associated well sites that require remediation and reclamation. 

The U.S. is projected to produce more crude oil than any other nation, including Saudi Arabia and Russia.  The July 10, 2018 forecast from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) predicts that, in 2019, U.S. crude oil production will grow to 11.8 million barrels a day.

On June 11, 2018, the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of Georgia issued a preliminary injunction preventing implementation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s 2015 Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule in 11 states including Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Utah, West Virginia and Wisconsin.  The court held that if the WOTUS rule became effective the states would suffer irreparable harm in both a “loss of sovereignty and unrecoverable monetary losses.” 

About the only thing that stakeholders agree on is that the risk assessment saga in Colorado means one thing – more study is needed. On March 27, 2018, the latest in a series of health risk studies was published by the Colorado School of Public Health at the University of Colorado Medical Campus. Using air emissions data taken from within the 500 foot regulatory setback requirement for homes near wells, the study concludes that people living in close proximity to oil and gas wells are subject to an increased risk of developing cancer.

On March 23, 2018, the President signed into law the BUILD Act of 2018, which significantly clarifies the potential scope of cleanup liability for tenants and state and local governments under the federal Superfund law.  Now, a tenant at an industrial or manufacturing site can, under appropriate circumstances, claim the “bona fide prospective purchaser” (BFPP) defense to Superfund liability and escape what would otherwise be strict, joint, and several owner/operator liability when leasing previously-contaminated property. 

On April 2, 2018, the EPA announced the results of its updated Midterm Evaluation (MTE) determination related to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions standards for cars and light trucks for model years 2022-2025. The agency stated that the current standards are not appropriate, and that it will work with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to set a notice and comment rulemaking to set new standards.

Authorized by Congress in 2012, the EPA’s Electronic Manifest System (e-Manifest) will become effective on June 30, 2018.  When they register, generators, transporters, and receivers of hazardous wastes will be able to use this system to facilitate the electronic transmission of the uniform hazardous waste manifest form.  States must adopt the provisions of the final rule in order to enforce them under state law and to maintain manifest program consistency.

On March 22, 2018, the Colorado Court of Appeals held that the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission’s authority to undertake unannounced, warrantless inspections (i.e., administrative searches) at oil and gas sites does NOT violate the U.S. or Colorado constitutions.

House Bill 1071, if enacted as written, will obviate the need for the Colorado Supreme Court to resolve the dilemma caused by the Colorado Court of Appeals opinion in the Martinez case.   As described in earlier Spencer Fane posts, that appellate decision effectively elevated the protection of public health and the environment over the interests of mineral rights owners and developers.  The issue before the Colorado Supreme Court is whether the current statute dictates that the Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC) implement a statutorily directed balancing act without giving priority to any particular interest.

On February 13, 2018, the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission approved new rules to require the industry to track the location of oil and gas pipelines. The new rules stem from an explosion in Firestone, Colorado caused by a leaking pipeline that destroyed a house and killed two people on April 17, 2017. That disaster triggered a massive public outcry, directives from the Governor, and now significant revisions to state regulations. 

A citizens group cleared the first major hurdle to obtaining a declaratory judgment compelling the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to consider whether to regulate the fluoridation of drinking water supplies under Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)’s Section 6(a) when a federal judge denied the EPA’s motion to dismiss the citizen group’s petition for such a declaration. Consequently, the citizen suit will proceed in evaluating whether EPA must initiate proceedings to decide if it should issue a rule under Section 6 to impose regulatory controls on fluoridation of drinking water.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency and United States Army Corps of Engineers last week took another step toward rolling back their 2015 proposed definition of “waters of the United States” (WOTUS). On November 22, 2017, the agencies published in the Federal Register a new proposed regulation to delay the effective date of the 2015 WOTUS rule until two years from the date of final action on the new proposal. The agencies seek comments until December 13, 2017, on their new November 22 proposal, so stakeholders who wish to comment have limited time to do so.

On October 25, 2017, the EPA announced that it had reached a settlement with Macy’s Retail Holding, Inc. (Macy’s) in connection with alleged violations of RCRA associated with retail goods and items that were improperly disposed of at department store locations. Under the settlement with EPA, Macy’s agrees to correct the violations, develop a training program for its retailers, conduct third-party audits of eleven of its largest facilities, pay $375,000 in civil penalties, and comply with other requirements within one year.