Utility Air Regulty Gp UARG

hired H&W to kill CPP (elbert lin America's power bs front)<div>=</div><div>=<div><a href="https://www.wvgazettemail.com/news/politics/ex-morrisey-aide-joins-law-firm-fighting-against-clean-power-plan/">https://www.wvgazettemail.com/news/politics/ex-morrisey-aide-joins-law-firm-fighting-against-clean-power-plan/</a></div><div> no lnx<div>
</div><div><div>former West Virginia Solicitor General Elbert Lin has landed a job with a corporate law firm that represents power companies in their fight against the enforcement of the federal Clean Power Plan regulations that seek to limit carbon pollution from coal-fired power plants.</div><div>
</div><div>Gazette-Mail file photo</div><div>
</div><div>Former West Virginia Solicitor General Elbert Lin has landed a job with a corporate law firm that represents power companies in their fight against the enforcement of the federal Clean Power Plan regulations that seek to limit carbon pollution from coal-fired power plants.</div><div>
</div><div>Lin, who was hired by the Hunton & Williams law firm this week, helped persuade the U.S. Supreme Court to place a stay on the Clean Power Plan regulations.</div><div>
</div><div>Last year, Lin and two Hunton & Williams lawyers took part in oral arguments against the Clean Power Plan before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. Hunton & Williams represented the Utility Regulatory Air Group, a trade association whose members include American Electric Power, Dominion Resources, Southern Company and Duke Energy.</div><div>
</div><div>In a press release, Hunton & Williams lauded Lin’s work as West Virginia’s solicitor general, saying he “won several critical victories in federal courts,” including a halt to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s efforts to enforce the Clean Power Plan.</div><div>
</div><div>The law firm’s release included a statement from West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey, Lin’s former boss.</div><div>
</div><div>“Elbert is a tremendous lawyer, writer and oral advocate whose talent and work ethic won him respect in the courtroom, in the office and throughout the community,” Morrisey said. “For more than four years, he played a leading role in many of this office’s successes, in matters of national and local importance. West Virginia is better off because of his and his family’s public service.”</div><div>
</div><div>The Clean Power Plan is on hold because of the U.S. Supreme Court’s order that blocked the measure pending a D.C. Circuit ruling.</div><div>
</div><div>The EPA rule, a centerpiece of the Obama administration’s efforts to combat climate change, would require reductions in carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants and has been strongly opposed by the mining industry and most West Virginia political leaders.</div><div>
</div><div>President Donald Trump has directed the EPA to begin the complex and potentially lengthy process of withdrawing the Clean Power Plan.</div><div>
</div><div>On Thursday, Trump nominated a Hunton & Williams lawyer, William Wehrum, to lead EPA’s air office, according to E&E News. Wehrum is a partner at Hunton & Williams.</div><div>
</div><div>Earlier in his career, Lin clerked for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.</div><div>
</div><div>Morrisey hired Lin in 2013, luring Lin away from the Wiley Rein law firm in Washington, D.C., where he successfully challenged the Federal Communications Commission’s first attempt at a net neutrality order, which aimed to establish internet regulations. After Morrisey hired him, Lin spent his first several months as Morrisey’s special assistant because he wasn’t licensed to practice law in West Virginia at the time.</div><div>
</div><div>As solicitor general, Lin oversaw the state’s civil and criminal appeals, federal litigation and attorney general opinions.</div><div>
</div><div>In June, the state Ethics Commission granted Lin’s request for an employment exemption, which allowed him to seek a job with a regulated private sector entity while continuing to be employed by the state.</div><div>
</div><div>Earlier this year, BuzzFeed reported that President Donald Trump’s administration had interviewed Lin for a federal district judgeship in Washington, D.C.</div><div>
</div><div>Reach Eric Eyre at ericeyre@wvgazettemail.com, 304-348-4869 or follow @ericeyre on Twitter.</div><div>=</div></div></div></div><div>=</div><div>ref</div><div>
</div><div><a href="https://www.energyandpolicy.org/uwag-and-uswag-the-secretive-utility-groups-that-target-epa-rules/">https://www.energyandpolicy.org/uwag-and-uswag-the-secretive-utility-groups-that-target-epa-rules/</a></div><div>
</div><div>may 2019</div><div>
</div><div>matt kasper</div><div>
</div><div><div class="entry-content" style="box-sizing: border-box; border: 0px; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: top;">The <a rel="noreferrer noopener" aria-label=" (opens in a new tab)" href="https://www.energyandpolicy.org/utility-air-regulatory-group/" target="blank" style="font-weight: inherit; box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;">Utility Air Regulatory Group</a> <a rel="noreferrer noopener" aria-label=" (opens in a new tab)" href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/10/epa-air-chief-3238271" target="blank" style="font-weight: inherit; box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;">announced</a> on Friday that its remaining members had decided to disband the embattled project after more than 40 years. UARG had been an unincorporated group of utilities represented by lawyers at Hunton Andrews Kurth that fought against clean air standards.But while the utilities may have dissolved UARG, the same corporations still have other “U Groups” that exist to attack EPA’s enforcement of the nation’s environmental laws. Just as utilities used UARG to target the Clean Air Act, they have the Utility Solid Waste Activities Group (USWAG) and the Utility Water Act Group (UWAG) to attack EPA’s enforcement of the Clean Water Act and other laws that utilities have long perceived as thorns in their sides.USWAG is represented by lawyers at Venable LLP. Attorneys from Hunton Andrews Kurth, the same firm that housed UARG, represent the members of UWAG. Both U-groups are set up similarly to UARG: unincorporated, voluntary, ad-hoc coalitions that do not disclose individual utility members. USWAG has been a party in 88 lawsuits since the early 1990s while UWAG has been a party in 99 cases since 2000, according to the Public Access to Court Electronic Records.<h4 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: 400; margin: 0px 0px 25.2344px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; clear: both; line-height: 1.2;">Utility Solid Waste Activities Group, Utility Water Act Group targeting Obama-era rules; also subsidized by utility customers</h4>UARG’s utility members faced intense scrutiny in recent months since <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/20/epa-air-pollution-regulations-wehrum-1191258" style="box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;">Politico obtained and published</a> confidential documents that outlined goals for a meeting of UARG’s policy committee to attack Obama-era clean air and public health rules.The spotlight brightened when leading Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee <a href="https://energycommerce.house.gov/newsroom/press-releases/ec-leaders-launch-investigation-of-secretive-front-group-uarg-and-its-ties" style="box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;">sent letters</a> to several member-utility CEOs asking for information about EPA air official Bill Wehrum’s relationship with UARG and its member companies. Wehrum was an attorney at Hunton and represented UARG. Congress <a href="https://www.whitehouse.senate.gov/news/release/democrats-call-for-investigation-of-top-epa-officials-role-in-reversing-enforcement-position" style="font-weight: inherit; box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;">is investigating</a> how he and another former Hunton lawyer now at the EPA, David Harlow, have helped reverse the agency’s position in a major enforcement action to favor a client of their former law firm – DTE Energy.The Congressional probe into UARG requested that the utilities state whether they had forced their customers to fund their annual contributions to the collective legal effort. Journalists and consumer advocates also pressed individual utilities to answer the question posed from the members of Congress. Several utilities, including <a href="https://insideepa.com/daily-news/utility-aep-tells-house-democrats-ratepayers-fund-uarg-dues" style="box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;">American Electric Power</a>, <a href="https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/aps-quits-lobbyist-group-ethics-probe-epa-officials-srp-tep-11273451" style="box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;">Arizona Public Service</a>, and <a href="https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/aps-quits-lobbyist-group-ethics-probe-epa-officials-srp-tep-11273451" style="box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;">Tucson Electric Power</a>, admitted that they force their customers to fund UARG expenses and therefore the legal challenges to the Clean Air Act. Others, such as <a href="https://www.stltoday.com/business/local/congressional-probe-looks-at-lobbying-group-funded-by-ameren-other/article_4c61b33d-b7fd-5e4c-9a08-d26a0d3a8486.html" style="font-weight: inherit; box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;">Ameren</a>, <a href="https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2019/04/11/house-panel-probes-dte-utility-support-industry-groups/3435466002/" style="font-weight: inherit; box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;">DTE Energy</a>, <a href="https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060169943" style="font-weight: inherit; box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;">Dominion</a>, and <a href="https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060169943" style="font-weight: inherit; box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;">Duke Energy</a> did not provide details about the source of UARG funding.Rate case filings reveal that many utilities similarly force their customers to fund their attacks on EPA’s ability to enforce the Clean Water Act via USWAG and UWAG. In 2017, the Minnesota Office of the Attorney General <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5770321-Minnesota-Attorney-General-Direct-Testimony.html#document/p52/a486802" style="font-weight: inherit; box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">argued</a> that customers of Minnesota Power shouldn’t foot the utility’s membership bill for both USWAG and UWAG. Missouri Public Service Commission Staff <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3461233-MO-PSC-Statement-of-Positions-EEI-Dues.html#document/p4/a353010" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: inherit; box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;">explained</a> that Ameren shouldn’t bill its customers $96,010 for UWAG annual dues and $47,163 for USWAG. And in November of 2018, the Kentucky Office of the Attorney General <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5765622-Kentucky-Attorney-General-Data-Requests-Kentucky.html#document/p69/a486078" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;">attempted to prevent</a> Louisville Gas & Electric and Kentucky Utilities customers from paying the $68,175 for USWAG annual dues and $109,501 for UWAG.In a 2016 Arizona Public Service rate case, the Residential Utility Consumer Office (RUCO) <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3625848-RUCO-Filing-APS-EEI-Dues.html#document/p37/a483616" style="font-weight: inherit; box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;">described</a> the U-groups as “purely voluntary, many of which are political in nature, and may not be necessary for the provision of utility services.”Earlier this month, <a href="https://insideepa.com/daily-news/5th-circuit-judges-appear-split-suit-over-delay-utility-effluent-rule" style="font-weight: inherit; box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;">UWAG attorneys were in court</a> to join the defense of the Trump administration’s two-year delay of Obama’s Effluent Limitations Guidelines (ELG) rule. Two years ago, Hunton attorneys representing UWAG <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-03/documents/letter_to_epa_submitting_petition_for_reconsideration_w_exhibits-c_508.pdf" style="box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;">petitioned the Trump EPA</a> to reconsider the ELG rule. Under President Obama, the EPA finalized an update to the rule as it hadn’t been updated since the early 1980s. The rule exists to limit the wastewater that power plants can discharge in waterways. That <a href="https://eelp.law.harvard.edu/2018/07/power-plant-effluent-limits/" style="box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;">wastewater includes</a> arsenic, lead, mercury, selenium, chromium, and cadmium.USWAG attorneys, meanwhile, have <a href="https://eelp.law.harvard.edu/2017/12/coal-ash-rule/" style="box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;">targeted a coal ash rule</a>, which the Obama Administration proposed in 2010 following the largest toxic waste spill in U.S. history at a Tennessee Valley Authority power plant in Kingston. One billion gallons of coal ash sludge destroyed 300 acres and dozens of homes. The rule established a set of requirements for the safe disposal of coal ash from coal-fired power plants. Similar to the ELG rule, <a href="https://eelp.law.harvard.edu/2017/12/coal-ash-rule/" style="font-weight: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;">USWAG was quick to petition</a> the Trump EPA to reconsider parts of the coal ash rule. In September 2017, then-EPA administrator Scott Pruitt <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/sites/www.sierraclub.org/files/blog/Signed%20CCR%20Petition%20Response2017-09-13-155129.pdf" style="font-weight: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;">announced</a> that it will review parts of the rule that USWAG addressed in their petition.Ten years after the Kingston spill that triggered the rule which USWAG has fought to undermine, 400 workers who cleaned up the spill have been sickened. Another 40 died, according to a tally maintained by the <a href="https://www.knoxnews.com/story/news/crime/2019/05/03/workplace-safety-rally-kingston-coal-ash-workers/3632667002/" style="font-weight: inherit; box-sizing: border-box; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(196, 209, 224); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s;">Knoxville News Sentinel</a>.</div><div class="entry-meta" style="box-sizing: border-box; border: 0px; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: top; display: inline-block; width: 841.203px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><ul class="meta-list" style="box-sizing: border-box; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 8.40625px 0px 50.4688px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; list-style: none;"><li class="meta-cat" style="box-sizing: border-box; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 20px 0px 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: top; display: inline;">Posted in: <a href="https://www.energyandpolicy.org/category/utilities/" rel="category tag" style="box-sizing: border-box; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none;">Utilities</a>, <a href="https://www.energyandpolicy.org/category/utilities/utility-air-regulatory-group/" rel="category tag" style="box-sizing: border-box; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none;">Utility Air Regulatory Group</a> </li><li class="meta-tag" style="box-sizing: border-box; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 10px 20px 0px 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: top; display: inline;">Tagged in: <a href="https://www.energyandpolicy.org/tag/uarg/" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: border-box; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none;">UARG</a>, <a href="https://www.energyandpolicy.org/tag/utility-air-regulatory-group/" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: border-box; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none;">Utility Air Regulatory Group</a>, <a href="https://www.energyandpolicy.org/tag/utility-solid-waste-activities-group/" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: border-box; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none;">Utility Solid Waste Activities Group</a>, <a href="https://www.energyandpolicy.org/tag/utility-water-act-group/" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: border-box; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none;">Utility Water Act Group</a>, <a href="https://www.energyandpolicy.org/tag/uwag/" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: border-box; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none;">UWAG</a></li></ul></div></div><div> =</div><div>=</div><div>see drilled on ohio UCSB, leah stokes</div><div>My book, <a href="https://www.leahstokes.com/book" style="text-decoration-line: none; overflow-wrap: break-word; white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Short Circuiting Policy</a>, examines the role that utilities have played in promoting climate denial and rolling back clean energy laws. </div><div></div><div>---</div><div>OMFG</div><div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/10/that-1970s-scourge-acid-rain-is-back/">https://www.alternet.org/2019/10/that-1970s-scourge-acid-rain-is-back/</a></div><div>
</div><div><div class="mag-header" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 19px; padding: 0px; position: relative; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><h3 class="magcat-titlte entry-title" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; letter-spacing: 1px;"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/10/that-1970s-scourge-acid-rain-is-back/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer; display: block; letter-spacing: 0px; line-height: 1.4;">1970s scourge acid rain is back</a></h3><div class="grid-post-box-meta mag-meta" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 7px 0px 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/author/sarah-okeson/" title="Posts by Sarah Okeson" class="author url fn" rel="author" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Sarah Okeson</a> / <a href="https://www.alternet.org/author/dc-report/" title="Posts by DC Report" class="author url fn" rel="author" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">DC Report</a></div></div><div class="mag-excerpt entry-content" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Starting in the 1970s acid rain turned hundreds of lakes and streams in Adirondack Park in upstate New York so acidic that fish could not survive. Acid rain can be…no lnx
That 1970s scourge acid rain is back
Written by Sarah Okeson / DC Report October 26, 2019Starting in the 1970s acid rain turned hundreds of lakes and streams in Adirondack Park in upstate New York so acidic that fish could not survive. Acid rain can be so toxic that it etches paint off cars.
The good news: some naturally reproducing trout were recently found in one body of water in the Adirondacks. Lake Colden had been without such naturally grown fish for 32 years. This revival comes after decades of government work to reduce the toxic air emissions that cause acid rain.
The bad news: Team Trump seems determined to create a comeback for acid rain. That would mean 500 other Adirondack ponds and lakes would continue without naturally breeding fish. Worse, some of the sprawling park’s 2,300 other bodies of water might also become too toxic for other wildlife such as crayfish, salamanders and frogs. And because acid rain leaches aluminum in the soil it also kills trees.
For people in the Northeast, it would also mean more asthma and heart disease as people breathe in air laced with greater amounts of sulfur dioxide, a toxic gas that causes acid rain.
The Trump EPA wants to squash Obama era rules that would force owners of electric power plants to clean up their toxic wastes.
To understand how Team Trump helps polluters and hurts everyone else, consider the coal-burning Martin Lake Power Plant in east Texas. It spews more sulfur dioxide than any other power plant in America. Last year it spit out 56,198 tons of sulfur dioxide, a 54% increase over 2017.
Acid rain, then and now.(From Environmental Defense Fund)]
Now the Trump EPA wants to squash Obama era rules that would force owners of this and other power plants to clean up their toxic wastes. Owners who escape these clean-up costs reap bigger profits. The rest of us pay the price: more sickness, shorter lives for some and hundreds of lakes with no fish surrounded by dying forests.
To help polluters escape those costs the Trump administration puts executives, lawyers and lobbyists for polluting companies in charge of various units of the Environmental Protection Agency and other regulatory bodies. Instead of enforcement of clean air laws, Team Trump runs a protection racket for polluters.
Plant Owners IdentifiedThe Texas power plant is owned by Luminant Generation Co., part of Vistra Energy. One of Vistra’s lobbying firms once employed a lawyer who was hired to head the Trump EPA air office. Vistra is one of nine politically connected polluters being scrutinized by Congressional investigators. In 2018 alone it gave more than $101,000 to members of Congress at a three-to-one ratio favoring Republicans.
The lawyer was Bill Wehrum, who oversaw the Trump EPA’s air policy office until he resigned in June during a federal ethics investigation. Previously Wehrum was a partner at Hunton & Williams where he made $2.1 million. That law firm is now known as Hunton Andrews Kurth. A Congressional report dubbed the law firm “industry’s secret pipeline to EPA.”
Vistra Energy paid $140,000 in lobbying fees last year to Hunton Andrews Kurth.
Wehrum was accused of repeatedly violating his ethics pledge and legal duty to refrain from EPA matters involving his former clients. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, known as CREW, in May filed a detailed 14-page complaint against Wehrum with the EPA’s acting inspector general.
Other big sulfur dioxide polluters include DTE Energy Co., represented by Hunton Andrews Kurth in a long battle with the EPA over pollution from its coal-fired power plant in Monroe, Mich. David Harlow, attorney for the EPA Office of Air and Radiation, previously represented DTE for Hunton Andrews Kurth.
Lobbyists As Regulators
Soon after Harlow and Wehrum joined the EPA, the agency changed its position on a core issue in DTE’s case, adopting the company’s view.
A slightly different pro-polluter tactic was adopted for the power plant in east Texas. With former lobbyists for polluters in charge, the EPA made a mistake during the Obama years when it declared that parts of two counties near the Martin Lake plant exceeded the standard for sulfur dioxide emissions.
Trump’s EPA now wants to say the two-county area is “unclassifiable.” That would allow the plant to continue spewing tons of toxic air.
Because of actions assisting polluters, environmentalists fear acid rain is back.
While rain typically is slightly acidic with a pH reading of close to 6, acid rain is sometimes 3.2. That may not seem like much because pH is a scale. But acid rain can be more than 200 times more acidic than pollution-free rainfall.
Acid Rain EffectsEPA infographic]
Today 500 of 2,800 lakes and ponds in Adirondack State Park cannot support the plants and aquatic life that once existed in them.
Worse, acid rain can cause people to develop asthma as they breathe in even small concentrations of sulfur dioxide and the tiny particles it can form in the air. And it’s deadly for trees, trout and turtles.

“The numbers are going in the wrong direction,” said William Janeway, executive director of the Adirondack Council, about rising acidity in Northeast rainfall.
Adirondack, a state park, covers more than six million acres, making it bigger than the combined acreage of Yosemite, Yellowstone, Glacier, Grand Canyon and the Great Smokies National Parks.
When power plants in the heartland burn coal laced with sulfur the toxic waste goes up smokestacks. Prevailing winds that tend to blow eastward then carry pollution from these coal-burning power plants to the Northeast where much of it falls in rain that kills. Team Trump not only thinks that is fine, it wants more acid rain.
</div></div><div>=</div></div>=<a href="https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/blog/us-utility-commissioners-a-key-factor-in-assessing-regulatory-risk">https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/blog/us-utility-commissioners-a-key-factor-in-assessing-regulatory-risk</a>omg DEFUNCT<p class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: rgb(254, 254, 254); box-sizing: inherit; -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.6; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; letter-spacing: -0.45px;"> electric utility trade group with ties to top U.S. Environmental Protection Agency officials will dissolve amid a congressional probe into whether the group inappropriately influenced Trump administration air and climate policy.<p class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: rgb(254, 254, 254); box-sizing: inherit; -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.6; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; letter-spacing: -0.45px;">The Utility Air Regulatory Group — one of the foremost legal challengers to Clean Air Act regulations over the last four decades — said in a May 10 statement that its membership will disband after a "wind down period," citing "substantial changes in the electricity sector."The announcement comes after the House Energy and Commerce Committee in April launched an investigation focused on whether EPA Office of Air and Radiation Administrator Bill Wehrum and Senior Counsel David Harlow, who formerly represented UARG as attorneys, violated federal ethics rules by working to reverse the EPA's position in ongoing Clean Air Act-related litigation.Run out of the law firm of Hunton Andrews and Kurth, UARG came under increased scrutiny when the news outlet Politico published documents in February showing that a coalition of coal-heavy utilities agreed to pay Wehrum's old firm $8.2 million in 2017.That same month, Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J., and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., asked the EPA's inspector general to investigate whether Wehrum or Harlow were improperly involved in drafting a December 2017 EPA guidance memo revising the agency's interpretation of a Clean Air Act permitting program that can trigger the need to install costly pollution controls.As part of its investigation, the House committee requested copies of all communications between the law firm and current EPA officials, as well as past communications Wehrum and Harlow had with the EPA during their tenure at Hunton. The requests also cited a 2016 report by S&P Global Market Intelligence detailing how power companies have wielded influence anonymously through the group for years.In addition, the committee asked eight different utilities — Ameren Corp., American Electric Power Co. Inc., First Energy, Southern Co., the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association Inc. and Vistra Energy Corp. — to disclose whether they used ratepayer funds to pay UARG dues. Some of those utilities have acknowledged doing so, while companies that quit the group prior to the Politico report and congressional investigation have stressed the group is no longer needed due to a marketwide shift away from coal-fired generation.<p class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: rgb(254, 254, 254); box-sizing: inherit; -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.6; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; letter-spacing: -0.45px;">A Hunton spokesman said in a May 10 email the firm "is proud" to have represented UARG members in the federal rulemaking process over the past 40 years. "Hunton will continue to assist its clients in this valuable process," the firm said.House Democrats said they were glad to see UARG break up, but they warned the committee's oversight will continue. "Our committee's investigation is not over," said Pallone, Rep. Paul Tonko, D-N.Y., and Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., in a statement. "Important questions remain about whether EPA officials William Wehrum and David Harlow continue to advance their former coal industry clients' agenda at EPA, and we intend to see those questions through."<p class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: rgb(254, 254, 254); box-sizing: inherit; -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; margin: 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.6; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; letter-spacing: -0.45px;">The EPA did not immediately respond to request for comment May 10.<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/utilities-knew-climate-change-2465743778.html" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">https://www.ecowatch.com/utilities-knew-climate-change-2465743778.html</a><div class="headline-container" style="margin-top: 10px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><h1 class="headline h1" style="margin: 10px; padding: 0px; position: relative; line-height: 31px;">#UtilitiesKnew, Too, Since 1968</h1></div><div id="utm_campaign" style="margin-top: 10px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="article-body body js-expandable clearfix js-listicle-body js-update-url selectionShareable" data-url="https://www.ecowatch.com/utilities-knew-climate-change-2465743778.html" data-headline="#UtilitiesKnew, Too, Since 1968" data-elid="2465743778" style="margin: 10px; line-height: 24px;"><div class="article-description body-description" style="margin-bottom: 10px;">The U.S. electric utility industry recognized decades ago that burning fossil fuels would lead to <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; word-wrap: break-word;">increased warming</a>, yet later opposed efforts to shift away from <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/coal" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; word-wrap: break-word;">coal</a>, according to a new <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8l-rYonMke-NG5ONVZkZVVJMG8/view" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; word-wrap: break-word;">report</a>.The lengthy report from the Energy and Policy Institute uses reams of archival documents to demonstrate that utility industry representatives knew as far back as 1968 that burning fossil fuels could trigger "catastrophic effects" on the climate.The report also claims that, despite continued research and consensus on climate throughout the 1970s and 80s, the industry continued to make investments in coal, joined coalitions and lobbying groups to oppose climate action and fund <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-denier" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; word-wrap: break-word;">climate denier</a> scientists.<div id="AdThrive_Content_1_desktop" class="adthrive-ad adthrive-dynamic adthrive-content" data-google-query-id="CPyRysuip9UCFUFKXgodDKcHMQ" style="margin-top: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px; text-align: center; overflow-x: visible !important;"><div id="google_ads_iframe_18190176/AdThrive_Content_1/58d2e52b44e6236dc5819ee2_0container" style="border: 0pt none;">"Nearly 50 years after scientists began to warn the electric utility industry about climate change, some utilities continue to stand in the way of real progress in addressing the problem," the report said.</div></div>Dave Anderson, a researcher at the Energy and Policy Institute who uncovered the documents, commented to the <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/utilities-climate-change_us_597673e0e4b0c95f375dd60d" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none; word-wrap: break-word;">Huffington Post</a> about the utility companies:"The evidence suggests they were very much involved in the deliberate deception [about the dangers of carbon emissions] going on at that time. Scientists had been warning for years that they could be a problem, and by the late 1980s, it was pretty clear there was an emerging consensus among scientists."For a deeper dive:<a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-climatechange-utilities-idUSKBN1AA1QT" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none; word-wrap: break-word;">Reuters</a>, <a href="http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/343636-study-utilities-knew-about-climate-change-risks-decades-ago" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none; word-wrap: break-word;">The Hill</a>, <a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/25072017/utilities-electricity-industry-knew-climate-change-risks-decades-ago-exxon" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none; word-wrap: break-word;">InsideClimate News</a>, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/utilities-climate-change_us_597673e0e4b0c95f375dd60d" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none; word-wrap: break-word;">Huffington Post</a>, <a href="https://www.texasobserver.org/despite-knowledge-of-climate-change-in-1970s-texas-utility-companies-funded-climate-denial/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none; word-wrap: break-word;">Texas Observer</a>, <a href="http://grist.org/briefly/utility-companies-knew-about-climate-change-for-decades-too/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none; word-wrap: break-word;">Grist</a></div></div><a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8l-rYonMke-NG5ONVZkZVVJMG8/view">https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8l-rYonMke-NG5ONVZkZVVJMG8/view</a>
no linkref reptIntroduction
In this report, the Energy and Policy Institute presents the findings of its investigation intowhat electric utilities knew about climate change in the years before the issue emerged firmlyonto the public stage in 1988, along with information about the industry’s role since then in
ongoing efforts to spread disinformation about climate science and block legal limits on heat-trapping carbon dioxide emissions.
It is a story with striking parallels to the ongoing investigations into what ExxonMobil andthe oil industry knew decades ago, long before they joined with electric utilities, automakers,and manufacturers to sow doubt about the causes and risks of climate change. It is also astory that is analogous to the investigations into the tobacco industry’s early knowledgeabout the health risks of smoking, and its deliberate decision to mislead the American peopleabout those risks.Long forgotten and overlooked documents reviewed for this report reveal that by 1968,scientists had begun to directly warn the electric utility industry about the possiblycatastrophic effects that carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels could one dayhave on the Earth and its climate. Scientific understanding of climate change then waslimited compared to what we know today, but by 1971 electric utilities knew enough toinclude a modest budget for research into the climatological “effects of CO2” and otherpower plant emissions in the industry’s long-term national research and development goalsfor through the year 2000.The documents also show that electric utilities, through the largely customer-funded EdisonElectric Institute (EEI) and Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), sponsored cutting-edgeclimate research during the 1970s and early 1980s. For example, starting in 1982, EPRIsponsored research by influential scientist Charles Keeling and the Scripps Institution ofOceanography that documented “virtually all that we knew at the time from measurementsof atmospheric CO2.”...</div>==nrdc:

Last week marked the deadline for lawsuits to challenge EPA’s Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) for power plants. Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) also got in on the action and officially <a href="http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=528e75c1-802a-23ad-4200-a269ed0211cd&IsPrint=true" style="border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(230, 239, 244); text-decoration: none;">announced</a> the launch of his <a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/jwalke/radioactive_spillover_from_sen.html" style="border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(230, 239, 244); text-decoration: none;">Congressional Review Act resolution</a> to void the MATS.

These health standards are a decade overdue, and will for the first time set national limits on toxic air pollution such as mercury, lead, and cancer-causing dioxins. The standards will reduce by 90% the mercury pollution that coal- and oil-burning power plants emit. Mercury is a dangerous neurotoxin that harms children’s developing brains and nervous systems, and power plants are the largest industrial source of mercury in the United States. Some of the more than 60 other toxic air pollutants emitted by power plants are known or suspected carcinogens, and EPA is finally <a href="http://www.epa.gov/mats/pdfs/20111221MATSsummaryfs.pdf" style="border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(230, 239, 244); text-decoration: none;">taking action</a> [pdf] to clean up this pollution.

In addition to significantly reduced neurotoxins and carcinogens, EPA <a href="http://www.epa.gov/mats/pdfs/20111221MATSimpactsfs.pdf" style="border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(230, 239, 244); text-decoration: none;">projects</a> [pdf] that starting in 2016, the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards every year will prevent: up to 11,000 premature deaths; nearly 5,000 heart attacks; 130,000 asthma attacks; 5,700 hospital and emergency room visits; and 540,000 days when people miss work and school.

Electric power companies across the country have unleashed their lawyers and lobbyists in Washington, attacking these important health standards <a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/jwalke/if_your_neighborhood_utility_i.html" style="border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(230, 239, 244); text-decoration: none;">in court and in Congress</a>. But many of these companies don’t want to be open about their attacks on important public health safeguards. These corporations hide behind specially created, blandly titled coalitions, which frequently serve as litigious mercenaries fighting clean air safeguards. Using a front group of convenience allows individual electric utility companies to shield their names and anti-public health crusades from public awareness.

So, if you are wondering whether your local power company is fighting in court against standards protecting us from mercury and other toxic air pollution, check out the list below that we compiled from the court filings and other sources:

Chase Power Development (subsidiary: Las Brisas Energy Center)

Deseret Power Electric Cooperative

Edgecombe Genco and Spruance Genco (both owned by Calypso Energy Holdings)

Kansas City Board of Public Utilities

<a href="http://midwestozonegroup.com/membercomp.html" style="border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(230, 239, 244); text-decoration: none;">Midwest Ozone Group</a> (members listed):

<li style="background-image: url(" http="http" switchboard.nrdc.org="switchboard.nrdc.org" media="media" bg-li.gif="bg-li.gif" list-style="list-style" none="none" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat"><a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ddoniger/priceless_elevator_conversatio.html" style="border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(230, 239, 244); text-decoration: none;">American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity</a> (<a href="http://www.cleancoalusa.org/about-us/members" style="border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(230, 239, 244); text-decoration: none;">ACCCE</a>) (members listed):</li>

</ul>

Alliance Resource Partners, L.P.

Alpha Natural Resources

Ameren

American Electric Power

Arch Coal,  Inc.

Electric Cooperatives of Arkansas

Basin Electric Power Cooperative

Berwind

BNSF Railway

Buckeye Power, Inc.

Caterpillar

Charah

Consol Energy

Crounse Corporation

CSX

Drummond Company, Inc.

DTE Energy

FirstEnergy

Jenmar

Joy Global Inc.

LG&E and KU

Luminant

Martin Engineering

MEC

NRP

Norfolk Southern

Oglethorpe Power

Peabody Energy

Prairie State

Southern Company

Sunflower Electric Power Corporation

Tenaska

Tenaska Trailblazer Energy Center

Tri-State

Union-Pacific

Western Fuels Association, Inc.

</blockquote>

<li style="background-image: url(" http="http" switchboard.nrdc.org="switchboard.nrdc.org" media="media" bg-li.gif="bg-li.gif" list-style="list-style" none="none" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" background-position="background-position" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat"><a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/paltman/the_hidden_costs_of_american_e.html" style="border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(230, 239, 244); text-decoration: none;">American Electric Power Company</a>. Subsidiaries: </li>

</ul>

Appalachian Power Company

Columbus Southern Power Company

Indiana Michigan Power Company

Kentucky Power Company

Ohio Power Company

</blockquote>

</ul>

Ameren IP

Ameren UE

Ameren CIPS

Ameren CILCO

</blockquote>

</ul>

<p style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Oak Grove Management

Power4Georgians

Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority

Sunflower Electric Power

Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association

White Stallion Energy Center

Wolverine Power Supply Cooperative

ARIPPA

Utility Air Regulatory Group* (members listed):

</ul>

LG&E Energy Corp.

Kentucky Utilities Company

Louisville Gas & Electric Company

Western Kentucky Energy

</blockquote>

</ul>

Alabama Power Company

Georgia Power Company

Gulf Power Company

Mississippi Power Company

Savannah Electric and Power Company

</blockquote>

</ul>

National Mining Association

National Rural Electric Cooperative Association

<a href="http://www.publicpower.org/" style="border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(230, 239, 244); text-decoration: none;">American Public Power Association</a> (representing public power utility companies; see<a href="http://www.publicpower.org/aboutpublic/ppstatelistings.cfm?navItemNumber=20965" style="border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(230, 239, 244); text-decoration: none;">here</a> for a listing of public power company members in your state).

* * * * *

* The “Utility Air Regulatory Group,” or UARG, is a challenger in both the <a href="http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2012/02/csapr_contributions.html" style="border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(230, 239, 244); text-decoration: none;">Cross State Air Pollution Rule</a> and MATS litigation. As you can see, many of the companies involved in the MATS litigation are members of UARG.

If you Google UARG, there’s no link to the organization, like the other companies listed above. The first result that a Google search returns is a <a href="http://www.hunton.com/air/?op=&ajax=no" style="border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(230, 239, 244); text-decoration: none;">link</a> to the law firm of Hunton & Williams’ air practice group. In comments filed regarding the MATS, UARG <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0044-1169" style="border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(230, 239, 244); text-decoration: none;">describes itself</a> as “a voluntary, not-for-profit group of electric utilities, other electric generating companies, and national trade associations. UARG's purpose is to participate on behalf of its members collectively in EPA's rulemakings under the Clean Air Act and other proceedings that affect the interests of electric generators and in related litigation.”

In effect, UARG has long been linked with the private law firm, Hunton & Williams, with little transparency and no obvious independence from its association with the law firm. This allows power companies to advocate for more pollution and weaker clean air standards through lobbying, litigation, and administrative rulemaking processes, hiding behind UARG's name. In fact, one must wonder whether one reason for UARG's creation was to shield the names of member companies from general public awareness when UARG advocates for dirtier results on the companies' behalf. The litigious efforts of UARG have resulted in numerous lawsuits to weaken, delay or nullify environmental and public health standards affecting the electric power sector.

In a recent <a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/jwalke/Duke%20UARG%20order.pdf" style="border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(230, 239, 244); text-decoration: none;">Clean Air Act enforcement case </a>[pdf] in the Middle District of North Carolina, UARG and one of its members, Duke Energy, argued that all of the communications among member companies and UARG should be considered privileged attorney-client information protected from disclosure in the litigation. The court rejected the notion that it should “treat the UARG as if it were a corporation so that all communications among members” would be privileged. (p. 25) Further, the court noted that UARG’s “approximately fifty members” (15) banding together “for a common purpose of making their will known to government regulators” (49) didn’t make the information privileged, and UARG was required to disclose the documents to the court.

Even though you might want to know if your local power company has joined federal litigation opposing the first-ever national standards for mercury and other toxic air pollution, you cannot always be sure. Groups like UARG make it possible for power companies to say one thing while their lawyers do another, and customers and the public don't know about this.

However, on rare occasions, the membership of UARG has slipped out. The last time we are aware this happened was in 2006, when UARG <a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/jwalke/UARG%20members%20from%202006%20filing%20on%20PM%20standards.pdf%20-%20Adobe%20Acrobat%20Pro.pdf" style="border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(230, 239, 244); text-decoration: none;">disclosed its members </a>when it submitted <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OAR-2001-0017-1629" style="border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(230, 239, 244); text-decoration: none;">comments</a> to EPA.

The list above is drawn from that 2006 list. If this list does not reflect UARG's current membership, I invite representatives for UARG or any power companies that are incorrectly listed here to contact me, and I will remove the company's name from this post.

Or, if a company does not support the lawsuits to void EPA’s life-saving Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, but is listed here by virtue of its membership in one of the litigating organizations, I invite those company’s representatives to publicly disavow the lawsuits.

It’s time for power companies to own up to their harmful air pollution and destructive legal tactics to prolong that pollution.

I’m going to call my local power company and ask them if they are a member of UARG. I'll ask if they are fighting in court to overturn the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards and keep poisoning my community’s air. I suggest you do so too.

===

===

#1 googlw result:

The Hunton & Williams LLP practice under the Clean Air Act and other air quality laws is one of the most extensive in the nation. The firm's environmental team began its air quality regulatory practice shortly after enactment of the Clean Air Act of 1970. The practice expanded as we assisted clients during the legislative development and implementation of the 1977 and 1990 amendments to the Act.

For more than three decades, the firm's environmental lawyers have provided clients a full range of services under all of the Act's major programs, including representation in rulemakings and administrative proceedings, new and existing source permitting, appellate litigation, enforcement defense, and business transactions. In the United States, our air regulatory practice includes representation at the federal, state, and local levels. Our International and European Environmental Law Practice also addresses air regulatory issues arising outside the United States. Working with our Government Relations team, we advocate our clients' interests before the executive and legislative branches of government and regulatory agencies around the world.

The firm's clients on Clean Air Act and other air quality matters include most major industrial groups that are affected by air quality regulations, including electric utility companies (both as individuals and through trade associations), chemical manufacturers, pulp and paper companies, oil and gas companies, aluminum manufacturing, petroleum pipeline entities, coal companies, waste disposal concerns, road builders, liquefied gas storage and distribution companies, pharmaceutical companies, and various other manufacturers. We also represent groups of clients (including the Utility Air Regulatory Group) collectively in rulemakings and litigation under the Act on matters involving a wide range of public policy, regulatory, and administrative law issues.

Regulatory Practice

Hunton & Williams' environmental lawyers participate in all types of administrative proceedings and rulemakings arising under clean air laws. Our national experience includes representation in numerous Clean Air Act rulemakings, including those addressing development, review, and implementation of National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS); control of new sources under the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS), New Source Review (NSR), and Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) programs; visibility impairment and Regional Haze; control of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) through technology-based MACT standards; regulation of motor vehicles, motor vehicle fuels, and fuel additives; development and implementation of market-based emission allowance trading programs, such as the Acid Rain Program and Federal NOx Budget Trading Program; transportation conformity and general conformity determinations; requirements for state and federal Title V Operating Permit Programs; and issues related to Tribal implementation of Clean Air Act programs. In rulemakings, our lawyers work both to make the rules the most reasonable possible and to create a complete record in the event of judicial review.

In addition to national rulemakings, our air regulatory lawyers also have experience:

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">participating on behalf of clients in EPA, state, and regional advisory committees and planning organizations on issues such as nonattainment, visibility impairment, and regional haze;</li>

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">assisting clients in commenting on agency guidance and policy on numerous air regulatory issues; and</li>

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">participating in state, and local rulemakings and administrative proceedings.</li>

</ul>

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">preparing applications for waivers and variances from state and federal emission or opacity standards;</li>

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">preparing petitions for approval of alternatives or exceptions to applicable requirements, including emission monitoring and reporting;</li>

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">challenging EPA risk assessments and health effect studies used to set dose-effect relationships and reference doses; and</li>

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">counseling clients on the multimedia impacts of air emissions including persistent bioacumulative toxics (PBTs) and eutrification of water bodies caused by nitrogen emissions.</li>

</ul>

Once rules are in place, Hunton & Williams' air lawyers help clients to understand and comply with applicable requirements. Building on experience gained through participation in rulemakings and defending enforcement actions, we also have experience:

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">assisting clients in identifying and interpreting applicable permitting and regulatory requirements and counseling clients on what is necessary to comply;</li>

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">educating company officials regarding the standards for certifying compliance under various programs, such as Title V and the Acid Rain Program, and assisting in the development and implementation of internal programs to support those compliance certifications; and</li>

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">assisting in design and performance of environmental audits and compliance assessments.</li>

</ul>

Some companies mistakenly view permitting as primarily presenting technical issues. Hunton & Williams' air lawyers regularly represent clients on a variety of legal issues associated with new and existing source permitting to avoid unnecessary requirements and to advocate permits terms that are clear, accurate, and reasonable. Specifically, we have experience:

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">developing and implementing strategies for avoiding applicability of major New Sources Review (NSR);</li>

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">counseling clients regarding preparation of PSD and NSR preconstruction permit applications, negotiating permit terms, preparing witnesses and material for public hearings, and litigating unfavorable permitting decisions;</li>

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">counseling clients regarding preparation of applications for Title V operating permits and permit revisions, and negotiating Title V and state permit conditions;</li>

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">assisting in development of Compliance Assurance Monitoring (CAM) plans for inclusion in Title V permits;</li>

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">assisting in development of "case-by-case" MACT requirements under § 112; and</li>

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">representing clients in appeals of air permits brought by citizen groups or other third parties.</li>

</ul>

Challenges in the federal courts to EPA actions under the Act are frequent and raise issues important to companies' compliance obligations as well as to the development of the law. Hunton & Williams' air lawyers represent clients in many of these judicial proceedings, sometimes challenging EPA, sometimes supporting EPA against challenges from environmental groups, state governments, or others.

Our lawyers have successfully represented clients in United States Court of Appeals challenges to both legislative and interpretive rules and have served as lead counsel in numerous multiparty challenges. Our list of representative cases is extensive, including many landmark cases involving Clean Air Act implementation and administrative law principles.

Although we have litigated many cases, not all of the appeals we file for our clients require judicial decisions.  In many instances, our lawyers have been successful in negotiating settlements under which EPA has voluntarily revised regulations or policy or issued helpful interpretations or guidance.

Enforcement

Hunton & Williams' air lawyers defend clients in enforcement actions brought by federal, state, and local agencies as well as in citizen suits. Our Clean Air Act defense experience includes:

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">representation of electric utility, pulp & paper, and chemical manufacturing industries in defense of major federal enforcement actions alleging violations of New Source Review (NSR) permitting requirements;</li>

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">successful defense in a significant penalty case against a chemical company, resulting in a holding that regulated entities must be given fair notice of changes in agency interpretation or application of environmental standards;</li>

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">development of strategies and defenses for use in defending and avoiding enforcement based on federal or state rules on "credible evidence" or on "compliance certifications" made by company officials; and</li>

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">numerous other representations in civil environmental enforcement and defense and defense of environmental crimes.</li>

</ul>

Air regulatory issues may also arise in the context of business transactions. Moreover, with the increased use of market-based systems for controlling pollution, air regulatory issues may even trigger such transactions. Hunton & Williams transactional air lawyers have:

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">coordinated air quality aspects of due diligence investigations and advised investors, sellers, and buyers on air regulatory related risks; </li>

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">prosecuted and defended commercial indemnification claims between buyers and sellers of facilities based on costs associated with air quality compliance matters that arise or are discovered after sale;</li>

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">counseled clients regarding emission allowance transactions under market-based programs, like the Acid Rain Program and state and federal NOx Budget Trading Programs; and</li>

<li style=" padding-bottom: 8px;">counseled and litigated on behalf of clients on Clean Air Act transportation conformity and general conformity issues related to land development projects.</li>

</ul>

<p style="margin: 0px 0px 18px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Hunton & Williams has one of the largest groups of lawyers in a single law firm representing clients on air quality matters. The examples above illustrate the breadth and variety of our air regulatory practice in dealing with national, local, and facility-specific issues. Our ability to combine knowledge, experience, and perspective regarding all aspects of air quality regulation, ranging from local to international levels, provides us with a truly unique air regulatory practice.