Zeldin previously served in the New York State Senate from 2011-2014 and later represented New York’s 1st Congressional District in the United States House of Representatives from 2015-2023. He is now in 22^nd year of military service and serves as a Lieutenant Colonel in the Army Reserve.

During his confirmation hearing, Zeldin said that once confirmed he will “foster a collaborative culture within the agency, supporting career staff who have dedicated themselves to this mission. I strongly believe we have a moral responsibility to be good stewards of our environment for generations to come.”

“Under President Trump’s leadership, we will take great strides to defend every American’s access to clean air, clean water, and clean land,” Zeldin said in an EPA press release. “We will maintain and expand the gold standard of environmental stewardship and conservation that President Trump set forth in his first administration while also prioritizing economic prosperity.”

During his eight years in Congress, Zeldin worked across party lines to preserve the Long Island Sound and Plum Island. He supported key legislation that became historic success stories like the Great American Outdoors Act and Save our Seas Act to clean up plastics from the oceans. He also led the fight for Sea Grant, combated per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in drinking water, voted for the Lautenberg Chemical Safety Act, and supported clean energy projects on Long Island.

Senators Divided Over Zeldin’s Confirmation at Hearing

Although Zeldin has led numerous projects aimed at protecting the environment, many expressed their disapproval of the EPA Administrator during his confirmation hearing.

“We need an EPA administrator who will take climate change seriously, treat the science honestly and stand up where necessary to the political pressure that will be coming from the White House, where we have a president who actually thinks (climate change) is a hoax, and from the huge fossil fuel forces that propelled him into office with enormous amounts of political money and who now think they own the place,” Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island said in a Senate speech. “The likelihood of [Zeldin] standing against that fossil fuel bulldozer that is coming at him is essentially zero. And in that context, this is very much the wrong guy.”

Whitehouse’s opinion falls in contrast to Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming who believes that Zeldin will “restore balance at the EPA.” “For the last four years, the so-called experts at the Environmental Protection Agency went on a reckless regulatory rampage,’’ Barrasso said, referring to the Biden administration. “They saddled American families and businesses with higher costs and heavy-handed restrictions. They bowed to climate extremism and ignored common sense,” Barrasso said.

Zeldin announced during his hearing that he wants to promote smart regulations that will allow American innovation to continue. He also said that he will aim to prioritize compliance as much as possible as he believes in the rule of law and [wants] to work with people to ensure they do their part to protect the environment.”

The post Senate Confirms Lee Zeldin as EPA Administrator appeared first on Compliance Chief 360.

On Aug. 23, more than two dozen environmental, consumer-protection, and public-health organizations formally petitioned the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to initiate rulemaking proceedings to list residential and commercial heating appliances as a source category subject to regulation under Section 111(b) of the Clean Air Act. The petition further calls on EPA to “promptly” set standards of performance requiring zero NO_x emissions from newly manufactured water heaters and furnaces within the source category.

Section 111(b) of the Clean Air Act legally obligates the EPA to list any category of stationary sources that “cause[s], or contribute[s] significantly to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare” and issue performance standards for that category within one year of a listing decision. In addition to NO_x emissions, fossil fuel-fired appliances also emit major amounts of carbon dioxide (CO₂), the signatory groups stated in their joint petition.

A press release issued by the Sierra Club noted that, “unlike other sectors with comparable emissions that are already limited under the Clean Air Act, no standards exist that limit emissions from buildings, which is a dangerous oversight.”

More than half the buildings in the United States rely on furnaces and water heaters powered by fossil fuels, according to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). Additionally, EIA data found that residential and commercial buildings in the United States now account for about 40 percent of total energy consumption and 14 percent of net greenhouse gas emissions.

“Fortunately, a non-emitting technology already exists for heating appliances that is highly efficient, readily available, and reasonably priced: electric heat pumps,” the Sierra Club stated. “The petition calls on EPA to phase in requirements that new water heaters and furnaces emit zero NO_x emissions through the use of this critical technology.”

“Emissions from buildings have a harmful, and frankly scary, impact on human health and contribute significantly to the climate crisis,” said Sierra Club’s Building Electrification Campaign Deputy Director Amneh Minkara. “Yet, the main driver of direct pollution from buildings, fossil fuel-fired heating appliances, are allowed to emit with no limits or oversight by the federal government.”

“It is the duty of the EPA to keep the American public safe from breathing in these pollutants,” Minkara added. “By transitioning to heat pump technology that has zero NOx emissions, we can protect public health while also curbing climate pollution as a co-benefit.” 

Jaclyn Jaeger is a contributing editor at Compliance Chief 360° and a freelance business writer based in Manchester, New Hampshire.

The post Activists Petition EPA To Crack Down On Fossil-Fueled Heating Appliances appeared first on Compliance Chief 360.

FCA US has been ordered to pay a $96.1 million fine and forfeiture of $203.6 million for lying about the “design, calibration, and function of the emissions control systems” on more than 100,000 of its model year 2014-16 Jeep Grand Cherokee and Ram 1500 diesel vehicles. It further lied about these vehicles’ emission of pollutants, fuel efficiency, and compliance with U.S. emissions standards, according to a Justice Department press release.

The Aug. 1 federal court sentencing followed a three-year investigation and a guilty plea entered by the company in June. “This resolution shows that the Department of Justice is committed to holding corporate wrongdoers accountable for misleading regulators,” said Assistant Attorney General Todd Kim of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division.

According to admissions and court documents, beginning at least as early as 2010, FCA US designed a “false and misleading” marketing campaign that represented to U.S. consumers that its Jeep Grand Cherokee and Ram 1500 vehicles complied with U.S. emissions requirements, had “best-in-class fuel efficiency,” and were equipped with “clean EcoDiesel engine[s],” designed to reduce emissions.

In reality, according to court documents, FCA US had installed emissions-control software features designed to cheat federal test procedures, while also receiving a fuel efficiency rating that could be marketed to FCA US’s potential customers as “best-in-class.” Specifically, FCA US purposely calibrated the emissions control systems on these vehicles to produce fewer toxic emissions during the federal test procedures than when FCA US’s customers were driving the vehicles under normal driving conditions.

Consequently, FCA US “made false and misleading representations to regulators” to ensure it obtained regulatory approval to sell the vehicles in the United States, the Justice Department stated.

FCA US then engaged in deceptive and fraudulent conduct to conceal the emissions impact and function of the emissions control systems from U.S. regulators and customers by “submitting false and misleading applications to U.S. regulators to receive authorization to sell the vehicles” and “making false and misleading representations to U.S. regulators both in person and in response to written requests for information,” the Justice Department stated.

Settlement Terms
Under the terms of FCA’s guilty plea, which has now been approved by the court, FCA agreed to continue to cooperate with the Justice Department in any ongoing or future criminal investigations relating to this conduct. Additionally, FCA US agreed to continue to implement a compliance and ethics program designed to prevent and detect fraudulent conduct throughout its operations and will report to the Department regarding remediation, implementation, and testing of its compliance program and internal controls, the Justice Department stated.

The Justice Department said it reached this agreement with FCA US based on several factors, including the nature and seriousness of the offense conduct; the company’s failure to voluntarily and timely disclose the conduct that triggered the investigation; and its failure to conduct sufficient, timely, or appropriate remedial action.

“FCA US received credit for cooperation with the Department’s investigation and has committed to further enhance its compliance program and internal controls,” the agency stated.

In related criminal prosecutions, three FCA employees—U.S. citizen Emanuele Palma, and two Italian nationals, Sergio Pasini and Gianluca Sabbioni—were indicted and await trial for their alleged role in the conspiracy and for violations of the Clean Air Act. The FBI and EPA’s Criminal Investigations Division are investigating the case. 

Jaclyn Jaeger is a contributing editor at Compliance Chief 360° and a freelance business writer based in Manchester, New Hampshire.

The post Fiat Chrysler to Pay $300M for Cheating U.S. Emissions Tests appeared first on Compliance Chief 360.

In a 6-3 decision in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, the Court ruled that Congress—not the EPA—has authority to devise emissions limits for power plants.

The Supreme Court’s decision addressed a yearslong controversy concerning the EPA’s authority under Section 111 of the Clean Air Act. In 2015, under the Obama administration, the EPA adopted the Clean Power Plan, which aimed to reduce carbon emissions from power plants and called on states to require clean energy alternatives, like wind and solar.

But in 2016, the Supreme Court temporarily blocked the Clean Power Plan preventing the rule from taking effect. It was then repealed in 2019 by the Trump administration, based on the argument that the EPA exceeded its authority under the Clean Air Act.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and supporting parties challenged the repeal. West Virginia argued, however, the EPA was overstepping its authority in regulating climate change, that the agency had authority to regulate only stationary sources including in the original Act.

Major Questions Doctrine
The Court’s June 30 decision marks the first time the Court in a majority opinion explicitly applied the so-called “major questions doctrine” to justify its decision. The language of that controversial doctrine states: “If an agency seeks to decide an issue of major national significance, its action must be supported by clear statutory authorization.”

“On EPA’s view of Section 111(d), Congress implicitly tasked it, and it alone, with balancing the many vital considerations of national policy implicated in the basic regulation of how Americans get their energy. There is little reason to think Congress did so,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion for the Court.

“Capping carbon dioxide emissions at a level that will force a nationwide transition away from the use of coal to generate electricity may be a sensible ‘solution to the crisis of the day.’” Roberts wrote. “But it is not plausible that Congress gave EPA the authority to adopt on its own such a regulatory scheme in Section 111(d).”

Roberts was joined in his majority opinion by Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett, all appointed by Republican presidents.

Justice Elena Kagan wrote a dissenting opinion critical of the majority decision, joined by Justices Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor. “Today the Court strips the EPA of the power Congress gave it to respond to ‘the most pressing environmental challenge of our time,” Kagan wrote. “This Court has obstructed EPA’s effort from the beginning. Right after the Obama administration issued the Clean Power Plan, the Court stayed its implementation,” she continued. “That action was unprecedented: Never before had the Court stayed a regulation then under review in the lower courts.”

Concluded Kagan, “The subject matter of the regulation here makes the Court’s intervention all the more troubling. Whatever else this Court may know about, it does not have a clue about how to address climate change. And let’s say the obvious: The stakes here are high. Yet, the Court today prevents congressionally authorized agency action to curb power plants’ carbon dioxide emissions. The Court appoints itself, instead of Congress or the expert agency—the decisionmaker on climate policy. I cannot think of many things more frightening.”

The Supreme Court’s ruling on the ability of the EPA to regulate greenhouse gas emissions comes in the wake of controversial decisions from the court overturning Roe v. Wade, limiting abortion rights, and on gun control. It will likely mark the end of a contentious season of Supreme Court rulings that have had a profound impact on companies and their compliance functions. 

Jaclyn Jaeger is a contributing editor at Compliance Chief 360° and a freelance business writer based in Manchester, New Hampshire.

The post Supreme Court Chills EPA’s Authority to Regulate Emissions appeared first on Compliance Chief 360.

Earlier this week, the EPA published preliminary Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) data about chemical releases, chemical waste management, and pollution prevention activities in 2020 at nearly 21,000 federal and industrial facilities across the country.

The dataset released is raw data and does not contain any summary or trend analysis. The EPA will use the data collected to conduct additional quality checks, inform the public about how to identify facilities that report to TRI, and uncover which chemicals certain facilities manage and in what quantities.

“TRI data enhance awareness and help support informed decision-making by companies, government agencies, non-governmental organizations, and the public when it comes to chemical waste management practices at facilities in our communities,” said Michal Freedhoff, an EPA administrator, in a statement.

PFAS Data Included
The term “PFAS” is used to describe various industrial chemicals used in products such as cookware, stain repellents, electronics, firefighting foam, and more. Many PFAS are extremely persistent in the environment and the human body due to their inability to break down and their rate of accumulation. Numerous adverse health outcomes have arisen from exposure to different PFAS chemicals, according to the EPA.

The National Defense Authorization Act in 2020 emboldened the EPA to include PFAS in its annual TRI reporting. With new data collected, the EPA said it will mobilize a “focused and more rapid” effort to increase its knowledge of the scope of PFAS contamination, something fairly understudied in the past, due to the widespread scale of PFAS use and the many kinds of PFAS that exist.

Outcomes of new findings could include compliance assistance, enforcement, or proposing modifications to the TRI reporting requirements for PFAS.

The EPA will include a section in the 2020 TRI National Analysis that will provide more detailed information, including further discussion on PFAS contamination, when the report is published early next year. 

Danny Flynn is assistant editor at Compliance Chief 360°.

The post EPA Includes PFAS in Toxic Release Data for the First Time appeared first on Compliance Chief 360.