Toxic Substances
Flame Retardants, Furniture, and Polar Bears
One woman’s search for a toxics-free couch in California
A year and a half ago, I found myself in a position that has caused so many people to rethink the world around them: impending parenthood. One of the many changes I decided to make in advance of welcoming our little bundle of joy was to procure a couch without flame retardants. Flame retardants have …
Continue reading “Flame Retardants, Furniture, and Polar Bears”
CONTINUE READINGThe Unreasonable Risk of TSCA Reform
Caught Between a Rock and a Hard Place
The Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act is no doubt generating significant conflict, including claims of undue industry influence, competing bills from prominent members of the same party, consternation among states, and divisions among health and environmental groups. And it may also be the closest we have gotten to TSCA reform—ever. …
Continue reading “The Unreasonable Risk of TSCA Reform”
CONTINUE READINGTSCA Reform: That’s A Good Thing, Right?
Reform of the federal chemicals statute, the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), is in the news again. It got me wondering, are we are better off with the devil we know? In a legislative era characterized by harsh partisanship and excruciating deadlocks, there are signs that TSCA reform could be a rare example of cooperation …
Continue reading “TSCA Reform: That’s A Good Thing, Right?”
CONTINUE READINGEPA Waters Down Final Rule for Coal Ash
EPA will improve new disposal sites for coal ash, but will have limited effect on old ones.
Exactly six years ago today, a dike ruptured near Kingston, Tennessee, dumping into the Clinch River some 1.1 billion gallons of coal ash slurry — or to use the more technical term, coal combustion residue. Last Friday, EPA issued a new regulation to deal with the issue. The rule is intended to protect groundwater from leaching from the ponds, …
Continue reading “EPA Waters Down Final Rule for Coal Ash”
CONTINUE READINGThe Death of Deference?
Yesterday, the Supreme Court granted cert. in several cases to hear the following question: “Whether the Environmental Protection Agency unreasonably refused to consider costs in determining whether it is appropriate to regulate hazardous air pollutants emitted by electric utilities.” The fundamental issue is whether it was unreasonable for EPA to interpret section 112 to preclude consideration …
Continue reading “The Death of Deference?”
CONTINUE READINGMick Jagger on Chemical Reform
Vermont’s new chemical program looks to be a mixed bag
Vermont just joined the posse of states taking chemical regulation reform into their own hands in the face of inaction in Congress. Last week the Green Mountain State enacted a new law covering chemicals in children’s products. (A children’s product is defined as “any consumer product, marketed for use by, marketed to, sold, offered for …
Continue reading “Mick Jagger on Chemical Reform”
CONTINUE READINGSupreme Court: North Carolina Tort Plaintiffs Can’t Sue for Latent Injuries from Contaminated Sites
Court holds that federal law doesn’t preempt state statutes of repose
This morning, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in CTS Corp. v. Waldburger. In this case, which my colleague Jesse Lueders described and analyzed in detail here and here, the Court had to decide whether state statutes of repose can bar tort lawsuits by people harmed by latent injuries from toxic contamination, by imposing …
CONTINUE READINGAnd Now For Something Completely Different: Chemical Facility Safety?
For the past few days we have all been focused—justifiably—on the EPA’s proposed carbon rule for power plants. But that’s not all EPA and the rest of the federal government have been up to recently. Today a federal interagency working group established under Executive Order 13650, Improving Chemical Facility Safety and Security (“EO 13650”) issued …
Continue reading “And Now For Something Completely Different: Chemical Facility Safety?”
CONTINUE READINGWhat’s in a Name?
Supreme Court arguments surround the policies and effects of limitations periods
A few weeks back, I posted about CTS Corp. v. Waldburger, a case then awaiting oral argument in the Supreme Court. As you may recall (or as you can read here, with links to relevant documents), Waldburger involves hazardous waste contamination, and a provision of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) that …
Continue reading “What’s in a Name?”
CONTINUE READINGStatutes of Limitations, Statutes of Repose, and Latent Harms
Can plaintiffs harmed years after exposure to toxic substances seek relief?
You may not have heard of CTS Corp. v. Waldburger. At a glance, it is relatively unremarkable, a private nuisance suit between landowners and a retired manufacturing facility. Much of the work on the plaintiffs’ side has been handled by students. In a sense, the case hasn’t even begun yet—a judge found that the plaintiffs waited …
Continue reading “Statutes of Limitations, Statutes of Repose, and Latent Harms”
CONTINUE READINGJoin Our Mailing List
Climate policy is changing rapidly. Stay in the loop with expert analysis via email Monday - Friday.
