From Michael Cooke of GT Tampa:

On Wednesday, January 18th, by letter to Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, the EPA advised that it would exercise enforcement discretion with respect to the 2011 notification deadlines for existing boilers and incinerators that have passed while the EPA’s administrative stay of its March 2011 new rules has been pending. This step is being taken due to the January 9, 2012, decision of U.S. District Court Judge Paul Friedman which vacated the administrative stay, a decision I discussed in my previous post. After analyzing the court’s decision, EPA has stated that it will issue a “no action assurance letter” shortly that informs sources it will not enforce any of the notification requirements for new or existing boilers that arise under the 2011 rule.   The EPA letter further states that it believes that noncompliance by existing sources with the 2011 rule “would be unlikely to warrant” civil enforcement action by third parties, but, in any event, such an action would require 60-days prior notice to EPA which would give EPA sufficient time to take further steps to address those impacts. With respect to new boilers and incinerators, the EPA concludes that there are no sources subject to requirements other than the notification obligations which now are being reconsidered. But EPA noted that, if it becomes aware of other permitting or compliance challenges for new sources as a result of the stay being vacated, EPA will issue a 90-day stay under the Clean Air Act or a longer stay under the Administrative Procedures Act (“APA”) consistent with the district court’s opinion on stays under the APA. Finally, the letter states that EPA recognizes that industry needs sufficient time to comply with these standards and that, subject to public comment, EPA intends to reset the “compliance clock” when it finalizes the rules which it reproposed last December.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Caleb Holmes Caleb Holmes

Caleb’s practice focuses on complex environmental litigation and environmental compliance. Caleb has represented clients in state and federal courts and in administrative proceedings. In his environmental litigation practice, Caleb often represents corporate clients in cost recovery, contribution and government enforcement actions under Comprehensive

Caleb’s practice focuses on complex environmental litigation and environmental compliance. Caleb has represented clients in state and federal courts and in administrative proceedings. In his environmental litigation practice, Caleb often represents corporate clients in cost recovery, contribution and government enforcement actions under Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). Caleb has litigated such matters through trial and has also helped clients negotiate and settle matters. He has worked with clients on cases involving a wide variety of contaminants, including but not limited to PCBs, PFAS, and dioxins. Caleb also has broad experience litigating complex commercial litigation, including products liability and mass tort/toxic tort matters. He has a depth of experience with all aspects of discovery, including work with experts, taking and defending depositions, motion practice, trial preparation and settlement negotiation.

Caleb provides practical advice to clients in the acquisition and disposition of businesses and assets and the re-development of brownfield sites. He works with clients to achieve compliance with state-specific voluntary cleanup programs, including Pennsylvania’s Land Recycling Program (Act 2).

Caleb counsels clients on compliance with a broad range of federal and state environmental laws, including RCRA, the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and a host of other federal and state environmental laws.

In addition to his legal work, Caleb is active in various professional and civic organizations. He is currently serving as the Council’s Secretary for the Pennsylvania Bar Association’s Environmental and Energy Law Section.