-
Comments to BLM on Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for Willow Master Development Plan
In 2020, the Bureau of Land Management approved an extraction plan known as the Willow Master Development Plan, which would authorize oil giant ConocoPhillips to drill in Alaska’s North Slope for 30 years. But a federal court blocked the Plan from going into effect, concluding that BLM’s analysis was deficient and failed to account for several important environmental considerations. With BLM now reopening its environmental review, we submitted comments calling on the agency to bolster its assessment of the Plan’s greenhouse gas emissions and economic need. Our comments, jointly filed with six other environmental groups, largely echo arguments from comments that we submitted when BLM was previously reviewing this proposal in 2019.
-
Amicus Brief on New Jersey’s Zero-Emissions Credits Program
In 2018, New Jersey established a Zero-Emissions Credits (ZECs) program, which provides subsidies to the state’s nuclear power plants for reducing carbon emissions in the energy sector. Our amicus brief explains how the Social Cost of Carbon is the best available estimate for valuing harms caused by carbon dioxide emissions. We also argue that the ZECs program should account for the benefits of avoided emissions both inside and outside of New Jersey.
-
Comments to OCC on Draft Principles for Climate-Related Financial Risk Management for Large Banks
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) has issued Draft Principles for Climate-Related Financial Risk Management for Large Banks. Along with partner organizations, we submitted comments supporting the OCC's Draft Principles and offering potential next steps for the OCC.
-
Reforming Pipeline Review
Taking a Closer Look at the Need for New Natural Gas Infrastructure
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) uses a flawed process to evaluate the need for new, long-lasting gas infrastructure such as interstate pipelines, resulting in a certification process that fails to serve the public interest. As FERC begins to re-examine its approval process for new natural gas infrastructure, our report analyzes the Commission’s authority to consider a broader range of factors when deciding whether a proposed project is in the public interest. The report offers four key recommendations for reform.
-
Comments to EPA and Army Corps of Engineers on Proposed Revised Definition of “Waters of the United States”
The Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps of Engineers recently proposed a rule to return to the pre-2015 definition of the term “waters of the United States” under the Clean Water Act. We submitted comments encouraging the agencies to more fully elucidate the benefits from the proposed regulation, as the current economic analysis understates the rule's positive environmental effects.
-
Mangling the Major Questions Doctrine
Published in Administrative Law Review
The Trump Administration construed the major questions doctrine enormously expansively and inconsistently, in ways untethered to the Court’s jurisprudence, turning it into little more than an invitation for courts to strike down regulations the Administration did not favor for policy-based reasons. Under the similarly wrongheaded and even broader arguments made by the Administration’s allies, all greenhouse gas regulations could be suspect on major question grounds. Bringing to light these argument's enormously problematic application of the doctrine is important to foreclose their successful revival in future administrations.
-
Comments on Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary
Policy Integrity submitted comments to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) on its Notice of Intent to Conduct Scoping and To Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary. Our comments describe some of the potential environmental and economic benefits of marine conservation, and suggest potential ways for NOAA to ensure that its environmental impact statement fully evaluates these effects.
-
Comments to EPA on Oil and Gas Sector Methane Standards
In November 2021, EPA proposed standards to regulate methane emissions from new and existing sources in the oil and natural gas sector. Policy Integrity submitted comments supporting the proposed standards, and recommending that EPA strengthen its proposal by regulating additional leaky sources; conducting a distributional analysis of the rule's expected impacts; extending the time frame of its analysis; quantifying co-benefits; and disaggregating costs and benefits to demonstrate that its proposed standards are both individually and cumulatively net beneficial.
We also submitted joint comments with a coalition of other environmental groups on EPA's use of the social cost of greenhouse gases (SC-GHG) in its proposed regulation, recommending that the agency expand its justification of its discount rates and inclusion of global damages in the SC-GHG, and affirm that the SC-GHG is a lower bound of projected climate impacts.
-
Comments to FHWA on EV Charging Infrastructure
The new Bipartisan Infrastructure Law establishes two funding programs through the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to invest in the deployment of electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure. In November, FHWA issued a request for information to shape forthcoming guidance for these programs and emphasized its interest in information on how the guidance could incorporate equity considerations. Policy Integrity submitted comments recommending steps that FHWA and applicants to these funding programs can take to rigorously consider the distributional effects of proposed EV charging infrastructure and factor those effects into ultimate grantmaking decisions. Our comments also recommend that FHWA require applicants to promote robust stakeholder engagement while funding proposals are being developed.
-
Joint Comments to DOE on Energy Efficiency Standard for Lightbulbs
Together with partner groups, we submitted joint comments to the Department of Energy (DOE) on it proposed energy efficiency standard for general service lamps (i.e. lightbulbs). Our comments applaud DOE for using the social cost of greenhouse gases (SC-GHGs) in analyzing the proposed rule, but encourage the agency to expand upon its rationale for adopting a global damages valuation and for the range of discount rates it applies to climate effects. We further recommend that DOE disclose the SC-GHG estimates that it applies after 2050.