Regulatory: What to expect in the energy sector
During President Obamas first term, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a series of aggressive rulemakings targeting coal-fired boilers, including those that supply power to the nations power grid, as well as institutional or industrial coal-fired boilers that serve a specific facility
March 13, 2013 at 07:00 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
During President Obama's first term, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a series of aggressive rulemakings targeting coal-fired boilers, including those that supply power to the nation's power grid, as well as institutional or industrial coal-fired boilers that serve a specific facility. At the same time, hydraulic fracturing changed the marketplace with respect to the supply and price of natural gas. These two factors are driving a sea change from coal to natural gas in terms of power generation, and the intersection of our nation's energy supply and environmental regulation has been squarely in focus during recent political campaigns.
As the Obama administration begins its second term, the EPA is likely to continue its aggressive regulation of the energy sector, and below are several areas where we think short-term action may be likely:
New source performance standards (NSPS): The Clean Air Act authorizes the EPA to develop technology-based standards that apply to specific categories of stationary sources. In 2012, the EPA issued a final NSPS for the oil and natural gas source category and issued final rules targeting the reduction of volatile organic compound emissions. In January 2013, however, the EPA announced that it would reconsider that standard, including potentially regulating methane emissions to address climate change. Also in 2012, the EPA proposed an NSPS for all power plants that would establish a pollution standard of 1,000 pounds of carbon dioxide per megawatt-hour of output—the level of emissions currently achieved by combined-cycle gas-fired power plants. New coal-fired power plants could achieve that limit only through the use of carbon capture and sequestration.
Hydraulic fracturing: Hydraulic fracturing is a game-changer in terms of its dramatic impact on the supply and price of natural gas. Our nation's energy infrastructure is being transformed as a result. However, the process of hydraulic fracturing has raised environmental concerns and as the activity has increased, so have calls for stricter regulation. In 2012, the EPA promulgated regulations establishing air standards for natural gas wells that are hydraulically fractured, requiring additional control methods to reduce methane emissions. The EPA also has undertaken a research project into hydraulic fracturing's effects on water supplies, due in 2014. It is likely that the EPA will seek to regulate the disposal of wastewater from hydraulic fracturing and the use of chemicals in the process.
Cooling water intake structures: To minimize the environmental impacts of cooling water intake systems, Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act requires the EPA to ensure that the location, design, construction and capacity of cooling water intake systems reflect the best technology available. Over the past decade, environmental groups have sued the EPA, alleging that it failed to promulgate regulations and that when it did promulgate regulations, the regulations were flawed. The EPA ultimately agreed to promulgate a final rule by July 2012. In July 2012, the EPA pushed its deadline for a final rule back to July 2013, in order to complete its analysis of data and to address public comments.
Coal ash: The EPA is considering two options for the regulation of coal combustion residuals (including coal ash) under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. One option would regulate coal combustion residuals as hazardous waste, which would subject it to much stricter disposal and storage standards. The second option would regulate coal ash as a non-hazardous waste subject to more lenient standards that would operate as guidance for state regulation. Environmental groups have sued the EPA seeking an order forcing the agency to choose between the options and to promulgate final standards. The EPA's current position is that it is not feasible, given the current state of the agency's knowledge, to set a rulemaking schedule, and that it must consider additional data.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCrypto Industry Eyes Legislation to Clarify Regulatory Framework
SEC Official Hints at More Restraint With Industry Bars, Less With Wells Meetings
4 minute readTrump Fires EEOC Commissioners, Kneecapping Democrat-Controlled Civil Rights Agency
Trending Stories
- 1Arguing Class Actions: With Friends Like These...
- 2How Some Elite Law Firms Are Growing Equity Partner Ranks Faster Than Others
- 3Fried Frank Partner Leaves for Paul Hastings to Start Tech Transactions Practice
- 4Stradley Ronon Welcomes Insurance Team From Mintz
- 5Weil Adds Acting Director of SEC Enforcement, Continuing Government Hiring Streak
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250