Publications – Page 4 – Emmett Clinic

Murray Energy Corporation, et al. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, et al. (D.C. Cir. No. 16-1127 and consolidated cases)

On January 25, 2017, the Emmett Clinic filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on behalf of Elsie M. Sunderland and eight other scientists in a challenge to EPA’s supplemental cost consideration for the Mercury and Air Toxics Rule.

Amicus Briefs Climate Change

Exxon Mobil Corporation v. Office of the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (Mass. Appeals Court No. 2017-P-0366)

On June 7, 2017, the Emmett Clinic filed an amicus brief on behalf of five former Massachusetts attorneys general in a case involving a claim by Exxon Mobil that the current AG, Maura Healey, should not be allowed to use a civil investigative demand (“CID”) to compel Exxon to release information regarding its climate change-related disclosures.

Amicus Briefs Clean Water Act

Sierra Club, Inc. v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service (9th Cir. No. 17-16560)

On November 20, 2017, the Clinic filed a brief in the Ninth Circuit supporting the release of important agency scientific documents under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The Clinic filed the amicus brief on behalf of the Union of Concerned Scientists in a case involving draft Endangered Species Act (ESA) documents prepared by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service (the Services) to assess the impact of a proposed Clean Water Act regulation on endangered and threatened species.

Amicus Briefs Agriculture

League of United Latin American Citizens, et al. v. Pruitt (9th Cir. No. 17-71636)

On February 13, 2018, the Clinic filed an amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit challenging the Environmental Protection Agency’s failure to ban agricultural uses of the organophosphate chlorpyrifos. The brief explains that a significant body of research from both epidemiological and animal studies has demonstrated that children are vulnerable to long-lasting neurological harm from exposure to chlorpyrifos during pregnancy, and that the EPA cannot reasonably cite scientific uncertainty as a basis for failing to take action.

Amicus Briefs Agriculture

National Family Farm Coalition, et al. v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, et al. (9th Cir. No. 17-70196)

On February 16, 2018, the Clinic filed an amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit on behalf of several farmer support organizations challenging the Environmental Protection Agency’s approval of Monsanto’s XtendiMax—a new formulation of the highly-volatile and toxic herbicide dicamba. The brief explains that EPA’s approval of the herbicide resulted in widespread harm throughout the South and Midwest in 2017, and that farmers who want to plant soybeans feel that they have lost their freedom of choice: either they plant Monsanto’s resistant seeds or risk having their crops killed by drift from a neighboring farmer’s field.

Amicus Briefs Defense of Science

Physicians for Social Responsibility, et al., v. E. Scott Pruitt (D.D.C. Case No. 17-2742 (TNM))

In Summer 2018, the Emmett Environmental Law & Policy Clinic filed amicus briefs in two cases challenging former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt’s directive to exclude scientists who hold EPA research grants from serving on the agency’s science advisory committees. The Clinic’s briefs, filed on behalf of former senior agency officials from both Republican and Democratic administrations, explain that the directive will undermine EPA’s ability to make scientifically-sound decisions and serves no countervailing beneficial purpose.

Amicus Briefs Climate Change

Hopi Tribe, et al., v. Donald Trump (D.D.C. Case No. 1:17-cv-02590 (TSC) and consolidated cases);

On November 19, 2018, the Emmett Environmental Law & Policy Clinic filed amicus briefs in support of lawsuits challenging President Trump’s shrinking of the Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments. The Clinic filed the briefs on behalf of 21 local elected officials from Utah, led by Salt Lake City Mayor Jackie Biskupski, Boulder Mayor Steve Cox, and Bluff Mayor Ann Leppanen. The briefs argue that shrinking the monuments will harm local economies and undermine efforts to shift away from fossil fuels toward more sustainable sources of energy.

Amicus Briefs Clean Water Act

County of Maui v. Hawai’i Wildlife Fund, et al. (U.S. 18-260)

On July 19, 2019, the Emmett Environmental Law & Policy Clinic filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court urging the Court to affirm the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision holding the County of Maui liable under the Clean Water Act for point source discharges conveyed to navigable water through groundwater. The Clinic argued that the 9th Circuit’s decision was consistent with decades-long NPDES permitting practices that applied the Clean Water Act in this manner, and that reversing that decision would lead to inconsistencies in legal protections for surface waters.

Amicus Briefs Defense of Science

Union of Concerned Scientists v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1st Cir. No. 19-1383)

On July 25, 2019, the Emmett Environmental Law & Policy Clinic filed an amicus brief on behalf of former officials in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and other federal agencies who are concerned that EPA’s directive to prohibit recipients of its grants from serving on EPA’s science advisory committees will weaken the agency’s ability to protect human health and the environment. The Clinic’s brief explains that scientists who receive EPA grants provide valuable and highly relevant scientific expertise to the agency, and barring them from the science advisory committees would impair EPA’s ability to base its decisions on the “best available science.”…

Comments on Regulations and Other Agency Actions Fracking

Comments on Proposed Modification of General Permit WGMR064

On November 16, 2011, the Clinic submitted comments on the Pennsylvania Bureau of Waste Management’s proposed revisions to general permit WGMR064. The revision would allow the use of natural gas well brines for dust suppression and road stabilization purposes.

Comments on Regulations and Other Agency Actions Clean Air Act

Comments on the Control of Emissions from Large Compression-Ignition Engines on Ocean-Going Vessels

On March 6, 2008, the Clinic submitted comments to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on the agency’s Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding the regulation of emissions from large (Category 3) engines on ocean-going vessels. In particular, the Clinic urged the agency to apply the Category 3 regulations to foreign-flagged vessels.

Comments on Regulations and Other Agency Actions Agriculture

Comments on USDA Proposed Changes to Nutrition Standards for School Lunch Programs

On April 12, 2011, the Clinic submitted comments to the U.S. Department of Agriculture on its proposed changes to the nutrition standards for school lunches. The Clinic’s comments urged the Department (1) to require a daily vegetarian option to protect the health of students with religious dietary restrictions, (2) to shift its commodity subsidies to support the purchase of more fresh fruit and vegetables, and (3) to broaden its regulatory impacts analysis to include the environmental impacts of meat production.

Comments on Regulations and Other Agency Actions Offshore Oil and Gas

Comments on Draft Safety Culture Policy Statement for Offshore Drilling

On March 20, 2013, the Clinic submitted comments to the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) on BSEE’s Draft Safety Culture Policy Statement for Offshore Drilling. In the comments, the Clinic argues that the draft’s focus on process safety is overly narrow, and that the Bureau should “guide organizations to design a safety culture that embeds a meaningful commitment to environmental safety and protection.”…

Comments on Regulations and Other Agency Actions Climate Change

Comments on PHMSA’s Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Oil Spill Response Plans for High-Hazard Flammable Trains

On September 30, 2014, the Clinic, in collaboration with Earthjustice, the Sierra Club, ForestEthics, and Oil Change International submitted comments on an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking issued by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) on potential revisions to its rules establishing the threshold for comprehensive oil spill response planning (OSRPs) by railroads carrying crude oil.

Comments on Regulations and Other Agency Actions Aquaculture

Comments on Proposed Regulations to Implement the Fishery Management Plan for Regulating Offshore Aquaculture in the Gulf of Mexico

On October 27, 2014, the Clinic, in collaboration with the Environmental Law Institute (ELI), submitted comments on regulations proposed by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to implement the Fishery Management Plan for Regulating Offshore Aquaculture in the Gulf of Mexico (FMP). The Clinic and ELI made a number of recommendations to help the NMFS further address and minimize environmental risks and impacts of offshore aquaculture.

Comments on Regulations and Other Agency Actions Offshore Oil and Gas

Comments on BOEM’s Draft Second Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DSSEIS) for the Chukchi Sea Planning Area, OCS Oil and Gas Lease Sale 193

On December 22, 2014, the Clinic submitted comments on the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s (BOEM) Draft Second Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DSSEIS) for the Chukchi Sea Planning Area, OCS Oil and Gas Lease Sale 193. The Clinic’s comments focused on BOEM’s analysis of the impacts of a Very Large Oil Spill, particularly (1) BOEM’s assumption that operators could stop an end-of-season spill during the Arctic winter and (2) shortcomings in the analysis of impacts of oil spill dispersants on wildlife and indigenous communities.

Comments on Regulations and Other Agency Actions Offshore Oil and Gas

Comments on DOI’s Draft Regulations on Oil and Gas and Sulphur Operations on the Outer Continental Shelf – Requirements for Exploratory Drilling on the Arctic Outer Continental Shelf

On May 27, 2015, the Clinic submitted comments on the Department of the Interior’s (“DOI”) proposed regulations for offshore exploratory oil drilling in the Arctic. The Clinic supported the agency’s proposals to require that operators maintain a secondary drill rig in the Arctic to respond to potential losses of well control and that operators have prompt access to, and immediately deploy, source control and containment equipment in the event of an oil spill.

Comments on Regulations and Other Agency Actions Clean Air Act

Comments on Proposed Supplemental Finding that it is Appropriate and Necessary to Regulate Hazardous Air Pollutants from Coal- and Oil- Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234)

On January 15, 2016, the Clinic submitted comments on behalf of a group of academic experts in ecology, economics, chemistry, environmental science, and environmental law supporting EPA’s conclusion that it is appropriate and necessary to regulate coal- and oil-fired electric steam generating units under section 112 of the Clean Air Act, and that the monetized benefits associated with the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) far exceed the costs of regulation.

Comments on Regulations and Other Agency Actions Climate Change

Comments on D.P.U. Docket 15-155 regarding tariff changes proposed by National Grid

On April 6, 2016, the Clinic submitted comments in the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities (DPU) Docket 15-155, regarding a utility’s request for approval of new electric distribution rates. The Clinic recommended that DPU review the proposed plans from an energy justice perspective and proposed the creation of a new tariff for virtual power plants to promote the deployment of distributed energy resources.

Comments on Regulations and Other Agency Actions Climate Change

Comments on D.P.U. Dockets 15-120, 15-121 and 15-122 for approval of Grid Modernization Plans

On April 14, 2016, the Clinic submitted comments in the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities (DPU) proceedings reviewing requests by investor-owned electric companies to approve their proposed grid modernization plans. The Clinic recommended that DPU review the proposed plans from a holistic energy justice perspective that considers access to benefits from innovation in the electric sector as well as impacts on consumer costs. The Clinic also asked that DPU create opportunities for the development and integration of virtual power plants into Massachusetts’ electric system as a way of advancing DPU’s vision of a modern grid that is cleaner, more efficient and more reliable while empowering customers to manage and reduce their energy costs.