COURSE CORRECTION Peter Manning Division Chief Environment, - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

“COURSE CORRECTION ”

Peter Manning Division Chief Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture Division

Disclaimers

■ The views expressed are mine, not the Attorney General’s ■ Not an opinion of the Attorney General

Department of Attorney General

ENRA Division

■ 21 attorneys and seven support staff ■ Department clients – Environment, Great Lakes and Energy, – Natural Resources – Agriculture and Rural Development ■ American Indian matters ■ Emergency Management

ENRA Division

■ Flint water ■ Enbridge’s Line 5 ■ PFAS ■ Lead and Copper Rule ■ EGLE permitting issues: Nestle’s water withdrawal, Aquila Mine in the U.P .

Early Environmental Initiatives

Attorney General Nessel identified several areas where she believed the office should change course from positions taken by the former Attorney General, including several significant environmental issues: ■ The challenge to the EGU-MATS rule ■ The challenge to the Clean Power Plan rule(s) ■ The challenge to the rule governing methane emissions from

• il and gas wells

■ The challenge to the “waters of the United States” (WOTUS) rule

EGU-MATS Rule

■ In 2012 the former AG was the lead

state challenging the Obama administration’s EGU-MATS rule - governing emissions of mercury and

• ther hazardous substances from

power plants ■ The rule was vacated by the U.S. Supreme Court and returned to EPA

■ In January 2019 AG Nessel withdrew as a party from the case challenging the rule ■ In February 2019 EPA issued a revised rule that AG Nessel is challenging

Clean Power Plan Rules

■ In 2015 the former AG joined other states challenging the Obama administration’s rules governing greenhouse gas emissions from existing and new power plants ■ The Trump administration took action to modify/rescind the rules ■ In January 2019 AG Nessel withdrew as a party from those cases ■ In August 2019 she joined other states challenging the Trump administration’s replacement rule - the Affordable Clean Energy rule

Oil and Gas Methane Emission Rules

■ In 2016 the former AG joined other states in challenging Obama administration rules governing methane emissions from oil and gas

• perations.

■ The Trump administration took several actions seeking to delay, rescind and replace the rule. ■ In January 2019 AG Nessel withdrew as a party from the ■ A new rule has been proposed which AG Nessel will likely challenge

WOTUS Rule

■ The former AG joined other states challenging the rule defining “waters

• f the United States” for purposes of

the Clean Water Act ■ In 2017 the Trump administration took action to rescind the new rule and/or readopt the prior WOTUS definition ■ On March 15, 2019 AG Nessel withdrew as a party from the challenge to the rule ■ She has joined a challenge to the Trump administration’s WOTUS rule

Additional Initiatives

■ The proposed rollback of motor vehicle GHG emission standards and revocation of the California waiver ■ The environmental impact statement supporting opening portions of the Artic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas development ■ Department of Energy’s proposals regarding its energy efficiency programs ■ Accidental Release Prevention Requirements under the Clean Air Act Risk Management Program ■ State section 401 certifications under the Clean Water Act ■ Endangered Species Act

PFAS

■ Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) which include Perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) and Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)

PFOA PFOS PFHxS PFNA PFBS GenX PFHxA

PFAS

■ Used in thousands of applications in the industrial, food, and textile industries: – Stain resistant carpet, furniture and clothes – Cookware – Food packaging – Waterproofing ■ Also used in fire fighting foam ■ Very stable, breaks down slowly in the environment, and highly soluble, easily transferring through soil to groundwater

Michigan PFAS Action Response Team (MPART)

■ Executive Order 2019-03 ■ Unique multi-agency approach ■ Leads coordination and cooperation among all levels of government ■ Directs implementation of state’s action strategy

15

Current clean-up standards

■ Groundwater cleanup standard = 70 ppt PFOA/PFOS ■ EPA Health Advisory standard = 70 ppt PFOA/PFOS ■ Surface water discharge standard = 11-12 ppt PFOA and 420- 12,000 ppt PFOS ■ No promulgated drinking water standard for public water supplies but that is in process ■ Not all PFAS covered

Health-Based Values

Specific PFAS

Parts Per Trillion (ppt) PFOA 8 PFOS 16 PFHxS 51 PFNA 6 PFBS 420 GenX 370 PFHxA 400,000

Wolverine Worldwide – Rockford MI

Wolverine Worldwide

Aqueous Fire Fighting Foam

Former Wurtsmith Air Force Base

PFAS Manufacturers

■ 3M, DuPont, Chemours and others manufactured multiple products containing PFAS since the 1950’s ■ Evidence that the potential threats to human health were known as early as the ‘80’s or ‘90’s ■ Multiple lawsuits have been brought against manufacturers ■ AG Nessel intends to pursue any claims against manufacturers on behalf of Michigan

Line 5

Vanenkevort Tug and Barge

Line 5 litigation

■ Two cases are pending between the State/the Attorney General and Enbridge ■ Enbridge’s lawsuit against the State alleging that the statute passed in the 2018 lame duck session authorized agreements to allow building a tunnel under the Straits ■ The Attorney General’s lawsuit against Enbridge alleging that Line 5 constitutes a public nuisance and violates the Public Trust Doctrine ■ Briefing will be completed by the end of the year and decisions should issued by early next year

Utility Ratepayer Advocacy

Utility Ratepayer Advocacy

■ Major priority for Attorney General Nessel ■ Working with the Association of Businesses Advocating Tariff Equity (ABATE) ■ Ensuring refunds from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act ■ Reducing Return on Equity rates ■ Defining the “Test year” for purpose of establishing rates ■ Intervening in more cases, e.g., smaller utilities, like Alpena Power, Upper Peninsula Power Co., and Northern States Power

Summary

■ Environmental and consumer issues are a priority ■ Supports stronger environmental regulation and more aggressive consumer advocacy ■ More alignment with Governor and agencies, e.g, she shares Governor’s concern with climate change and clean drinking water ■ More focus on enforcement, including criminal enforcement

Questions?

Peter Manning Division Chief Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture Division Michigan Department of Attorney General 525 W. Ottawa Street (517) 335-7664 manningp@michigan.gov