December 10, 2013
What do you think about when you hear “Cross State Pollution”? Pollution does not respect boundaries, time zones or political maps. Pollution spreads through corresponding wind patterns. This cross state concern will produce questions on responsibility to liability and then accountability. Further, leading to mitigation and risk supporting standards, protocols, systems and prevention. The breaking news that the Supreme “Court Looks At EPA Rule On Cross-State Pollution” is start understanding responsibility and placing penalties on the contributors.
The Supreme Court is indicating it could revive a federal regulation intended to reduce power plant pollution that contributes to unhealthy air in neighboring states. Several justices suggested during a 90-minute argument Tuesday that they believe the Environmental Protection Agency did not exceed its authority when it issued its cross-state air pollution rule in 2011. A divided federal appeals court panel invalidated the rule last year.
Justice Department lawyer Malcolm Stewart said the EPA is trying to be “an honest broker” between the upwind and downwind states.
The EPA sought to reduce pollution from power plants in more than two-dozen Midwestern and Southern states that drifts above states along the Atlantic coast. Texas led 14 states and industry groups in challenging the rule. Most downwind states support it,” reports NPR and THE ASSOCIATED PRESS.
The case is pushing Governors to understand the impact. “The governors will petition the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to require nine states — Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia — to reduce emissions,” in the post “Northeastern states will press Midwest, Appalachia on clean air“. The eight downwind states say they have spent billions to reduce their own air pollution, but that pollution from elsewhere still overwhelms their environments,” reports the Washington Post.
The business case is how will corporations be effected. This case will result in penalties on corporations or pollution producers. The cry from corporations can and almost certainly will be the cost to the company’s bottom line as they seek remedies to reduce pollutants to zero emissions. The new trend is the balance and nexuses between environment, emissions and the cost-to-doing business.
This case will have a large impact on an industry sector that is already under attack, manufacturing. Manufacturing standards, ISO and quality have made an impact, yet this case can necessitate higher standards from process-to-production across the OEM’s supply chain ultimately producing continued improvements that translate to margins and the bottom line and inevitably passed to the user and/or consumer.
Related articles on Cross State Pollution
- Court looks at EPA rule on cross-state pollution (thedailyrecord.com)
- US supreme court to rule on EPA’s powers to enforce air pollution limits (theguardian.com)
- Court looks at EPA rule on cross-state pollution (utsandiego.com)
- Court looks at EPA rule on cross-state pollution (kansascity.com)
- Supreme Court to rule on EPA’s powers to enforce air pollution limits (rawstory.com)