Forgot password?
Sign up today and your first download is free.


Environmentalists say a new EPA analysis that finds negligible benefits for soybean production from the use of controversial neonicotinoid pesticides could boost calls for prohibition of the substances that advocates blame for harming pollinators, though the agency cautions that the study is only part of an ongoing review of neonicotinoids.

EPA has made a preliminary determination that drinking water regulation is necessary for the chemical strontium -- only the second time it has issued such a finding since 1996 -- but says no rules are necessary for four other drinking water contaminants, while punting for now on whether regulation is necessary for two other substances.

Electric vehicle (EV) supporters are raising concerns about the potential harm EPA's greenhouse gas (GHG) rules for existing power plants could pose for the nascent auto sector, fearing policymakers will no longer encourage EV use because they will increase electricity demand and related GHG emissions, thus hampering compliance with EPA's rule.

The EV supporters are especially concerned in cases where states use mass-based measures to assess their compliance with EPA's rules, rather than the rate-based targets that EPA initially proposed.

The chemical industry is urging the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to swiftly review an EPA regulatory proposal that would broadly limit allowable uses of long-chain perfluoroalkyl carboxylate (LCPFAC) and perfluoroalkly sulfonate (PFAS) chemicals, part of an effort to shore up industry's phase-out agreement with the agency.

The American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE) has released new modeling that predicts far higher costs and coal plant retirements than EPA expects for its proposed existing source performance standards (ESPS) to limit greenhouse gases (GHGs) at existing power plants, using assumptions that many critics of the rule have charged are more realistic than those the agency used.

A fight between EPA and its critics over a bid for the Supreme Court to review an appellate court ruling upholding the agency's utility air toxics regulation could hinge on whether the justices believe they must take the case to resolve whether EPA should have weighed costs in its decision to regulate power plants with air toxics limits.