Sentences with phrase «clean water rules»

Attorney General Eric Schneiderman's office on Thursday announced it will lead a multi-state coalition to sue over a change to the federal Clean Water Rule.

This include wetlands protection, a weakening of clean water rules, a reduction in state funding for recycling, a conclusion for the office of Energy Independence and a removal of a loan and grant system that encourages companies to be energy efficient.

However, Gov. Andrew Cuomo ordered staffers to probe the dumping and the state Department of Environmental Conservation has said the board's action violated clean water rules and regulations.

Seven scientific societies are speaking out against President Donald Trump's executive order targeting the contentious Clean Water Rule.

The Trump administration's 42 - page proposal for repealing former President Obama's Clean Water Rule largely builds its case on a 2009 split decision by the Supreme Court on federal regulation of swear words on television.

Shortly after, on June 27, 2011, the AP reported that AEP spent $ 2 million lobbying on clean air and clean water rules in the 1st quarter of 2011, according to a disclosure report.

President Trump signed an Executive Order that begins to unwind the Obama administration's controversial Clean Water Rule.

Because as more bodies of water are covered - more property owners often challenge the federal government - about whether they have the right - to invoke Clean Water rules - on private property.

The Trump administration has already rolled back a number of environmental regulations and moved toward delaying the Clean Water Rule, which clarified the Clean Water Act to prevent industries from dumping pollutants into waterways and wetlands.

Indeed, Trump's proposed budget cuts funding for the Environmental Protection Agency by 31 %, and specifically eliminates measures designed to preserve clean air and water and ward off climate change — including Obama - era legislation amending the longstanding Clean Air Act and creating what is literally known as the Clean Water Rule.

AG Eric Schneiderman, leading a coalition of 11 attorneys general, today sued the Trump Administration for suspending the 2015 «Clean Water Rule» — a federal regulation designed to ensure the nation's lakes, rivers, streams, and wetlands receive proper protection under the federal Clean Water Act.

New York state Attorney General Eric Schneiderman criticized President Donald Trump's approval of scaling back the Clean Water Rule that protects the nation's water streams from pollution.

Schneiderman is a vocal critic of Trump's policies, recently condemning Trump's executive order on scaling back the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Water Rule and filing lawsuits against his executive orders banning entry from several Muslim majority countries and halting U.S. acceptance on refugees.

«The Clean Water Rule is a common sense application of the law and the best science to protect our waters.

A proposal to repeal the 2015 Clean Water Rule (Waters of the US) that updated the Clean Water Act in order to apply federal regulation to US waterways.

Erie County, New York - Legislator Patrick Burke who garnered national recognition for his ban on microbead plastics, has submitted a resolution expressing his opposition to the Trump Administration's proposed elimination of the Clean Water Rule, as well as the stark reductions in Environmental Protection Agency funding that would cut funds for the Great Lakes pollution cleanup by 97 %.

The group, led by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, said in a statement: «The Clean Water Rule is a measured, reasonable, and lawful application of sound and uncontroverted science to protect our nation's upstream source waters.

He claimed that the federal government's clean water rules were costing small communities like the ones in his district a small fortune to enforce.

Finalized by the Obama administration in May 2015, the Clean Water Rule, also known as the Waters of the U.S. rule, or WOTUS, caught the ire of farmers, land developers and energy companies.

Natural Resources Defense Council attorney Jon Devine characterized the administration's reliance on Fox as an attempt to avoid contending with «the science that underlies the Clean Water Rule.»

Obama's Clean Water Rule — also known as the Waters of the U.S., or WOTUS — sought to clarify which wetlands and small, isolate waterways get protected under the landmark 1972 environmental law, the Clean Water Act.

«The notion of returning rules to the messy state they were in prior to the Clean Water Rule as a remedy for some alleged confusion is pretty weird,» Devine said.

Some farmers are concerned about the impact that the clean water rule could have on their operations.

The Clean Water Rule extends federal authority over smaller streams and marshes, but farmers, builders and others say it goes too far.

It will be important to watch how these new leaders and their policy decisions affect environmental protections, such as ozone and methane emissions standards, renewable energy fuel and energy efficiency standards and the clean water rule.

Speaking of water, he's working to repeal the clean water rule that ensures protection for wetlands, rivers and streams that provide drinking water to a third of all Americans.

«Protecting our water sources is a critical component of adapting to climate change impacts like drought, sea level rise, stronger storms, and warmer temperatures — which is why EPA and the Army have finalized the Clean Water Rule to protect these important waters, so we can strengthen our economy and provide certainty to American businesses.»

«Clean Water Rule: Definition of «Waters of the United States»» (PDF), Federal Register Vol.

Jeff Holmstead's job as their lobbyist is to delay any clean air rules, clean water rules or climate change laws that threaten the billions in profit these companies make by getting to pollute for free.

In tandem, prevent the Trump administration's attempt to repeal the Clean Water Rule, an essential tool for protecting wetlands.

As reported in our prior Update, in a decision issued on January 22, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in National Association of Manufacturers v. Department of Defense, 138 S. Ct. 617, that challenges to the Obama administration's 2015 Clean Water Rule must be brought in federal district courts, rather than directly in the federal courts of appeals.

In 2 - 1 ruling, appeals court says a nationwide stay «honors the policy of cooperative federalism that informs the Clean Water Act» The Sixth Circuit has stayed implementation of the «Waters of the United States» (WOTUS) rule (or, as EPA would have it, the Clean Water Rule).

An agency spokeswoman said the action would «amend the effective date associated with the 2015 Clean Water Rule to give the agencies time to consider the two - step process proposing to rescind and revise the 2015 rule.»

The Supreme Court has agreed to take up the dispute over which lower courts have jurisdiction to hear challenges to the Obama administration's Clean Water Rule.

The EPA and Army Corps of Engineers have recently proposed a rule to repeal of the 2015 Clean Water Rule and recodify the pre-existing Rules.

The letter reiterated WAC members» concerns that the Clean Water Rule (1) failed to preserve the States» traditional and primary authority over land and water use; (2) ignored the limits set by Congress and recognized by the Supreme Court; and (3) were confusing, arbitrary and deleted current scientific data.

The comments support the EPA's and Army Corps of Engineers» proposed repeal of the 2015 Clean Water Rule and recodification of pre-existing Rules.

The Clean Water Rule was stayed by the 6th Circuit Appeals Court in October 2015 and was never fully implemented.

NAR wrote a comment letter that reiterated concerns that the Clean Water Rule (1) failed to preserve the States» traditional and primary authority over land and water use; (2) ignored the limits set by Congress and recognized by the Supreme Court; and (3) were confusing, arbitrary and deleted current scientific data.

The Supreme Court has agreed to take up the dispute over which lower courts have jurisdiction to hear challenges to the Clean Water Rule.