Fostering improved, clean transportation has the potential to benefit the country enormously, and advances key goals of the Biden Administration. The transportation sector is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States, accounting for one-third of all emissions, and must be addressed for there to be any hope of meeting climate goals. Transportation also affects every American's day-to-day life, from how they participate in their communities to how they pursue economic opportunity and empowerment, representing a significant opportunity to promote equitable growth.
The Blueprint is the Administration's most fleshed out vision for pursuing these goals. The Blueprint outlines a comprehensive approach, addressing changes to every mode of transportation, and proposing to do so through virtually every policy lever available—a true "whole of government" approach. It is consistent with, and further advances, key themes in the President's climate policy enunciated from day one, and further reflected in his signature legislative accomplishments, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).
The Blueprint was a highlight of government speakers at the recent Government/Industry Conference for the auto industry, sponsored by the Society of Automotive Engineers: In a keynote, Gabe Klein, Executive Director of the newly formed DOE-DOT Joint Office of Energy & Transportation, called it the "most important policy document in a decade."
Below are some of the key features:
- Multiple technological solutions will be needed, reflecting an evolving decarbonization path for several sectors. To many, the electric passenger car is the symbol of transportation decarbonization. But power demands and weight considerations, among other issues, may make it more difficult to use this technology in other sectors, including on-highway freight, maritime, and aviation. The Blueprint recognizes that additional technology must be deployed, including those not yet fully commercialized. It focuses on three: battery electric, hydrogen fuel cell, and sustainable biofuel.
The continued prominence of liquid fuels in a transportation decarbonization plan is especially notable. There remains active debate, even within the agencies which authored the Blueprint as to whether the types of "sustainable" fuels being promoted have the full range of climate benefits they claim.
- But new technology is not the only tool. In addition to developing and deploying clean technology, the Blueprint will promote measures to decrease transportation demand and increase transportation efficiency. The Blueprint seeks to redesign the communities in which we live, so that people are physically closer to where they work, learn, and recreate. Consistent with the Biden Administration's "whole of government" approach, this will involve policymakers outside of the four agencies who authored the report, including non-federal entities like towns, cities, and counties with jurisdiction over zoning laws that shape land use. The Blueprint also stresses policies to encourage the most climate-friendly mode of transportation when movement is necessary: For movement of people, this will likely result in renewed focus on mass transit and emission-free micromobility options.
- A three stage timeline with interim targets. Broadly speaking, between now and 2030, the Blueprint focuses most on research and investments to support deployment.In the 2030s, the focus is on scaling up clean transportation solutions, and the 2040s will be about completing the transition to a net zero transportation sector. But there are plenty of interim benchmarks in between, such as a commitment that all new light-duty acquisitions for the federal fleet be zero emission by 2027, and 30% of private sales of medium and heavy duty vehicles be zero emission by 2030.
- Continued focus on equity. Ensuring a just transition of the transportation sector is a cornerstone of the Blueprint. Among other concerns, this will mean a focus on ensuring that zero emissions technology successfully penetrates all communities. This could mean creating enhanced subsidies for acquiring electric vehicles, ensuring charging stations are meaningfully available in historically overburdened neighborhoods, and ensuring that transit service is fully accessible for the differently abled.
- Interaction with advanced driver assistance technology (ADAS). The Blueprint acknowledges that transportation will "dramatically change" in "ways that are hard to forecast," focusing in particular on another transformational shift occurring in the transportation sector: the emergence of automation and connectivity, up to full vehicle automation. Although such technology is often discussed for its appealing safety benefits, it may also reduce congestion and result in significant environmental gains as well.
- The continued role of agency-promulgated regulatory standards. The Blueprint is clear that agency-promulgated, technology-forcing regulation has an important role to play in decarbonizing transport, even if the BIL and IRA focused mainly on incentive-based mechanisms. The Blueprint specifically mentions renewable fuel standards, and emissions standards for heavy duty on-highway, off road, and fuel pipeline transportation. More are likely in store, although the Biden Administration will have to tread carefully in light of recent Supreme Court precedent narrowly interpreting the agency enabling statutes that will serve as the authority for these rules.
Whether the Blueprint's lofty ambitions will be met remains to be seen, but the document is an important outline of the federal agenda to come, at least for the remainder of Biden's presidency. The transportation sector is in the process of fundamental change, set to dramatically reduce where feasible uses of the internal combustion engine—the technology that served as its bedrock for over 100 years. This process will create exciting opportunities and difficult choices, and the Blueprint provides important insight into federal priorities that should be thoroughly understood when engaging policymakers going forward and when making investment decisions.
The ACM has also issued Guidelines regarding collaborations between farmers (Leidraad samenwerking landbouwers).这些准则阐明了竞争规则允许农民之间合作的一些主要可能性。关于可持续性考量问题,准则分章专门探讨协作问题,作为可持续性倡议的一部分此类协作可采取横向或纵向协议形式(农商和供货商/买主之间协议形式)。协议甚至可以涉及售价或生产量,如果这样做是必不可缺的。协议必须是实现可持续性目标所必备的,否则是不允许的 。
com/2022/05/可持久性-european-commissions-此类协议无法引起竞争法问题如果协议会影响竞争参数,则会受第101条TFEU约束,但有可能从第101(3)条下的豁免中受益可能的免责因纯经济原因不足,例如保护牛奶生产者高收入,Bka前的拟议方案强调了这一点。可持久协议提供客观环境效益,即 i.e.最后,将可持续性福利视为全社会福利并将其纳入法律引入的反托拉斯框架可预示竞争分析和实践新时代的到来。 近些年来,为将可持续性考量纳入反托拉斯分析做出了重大努力。竞争管理委员会和国家竞争管理机构,特别是HCC似乎接受公司提出的可持续性倡议但也存在不同的决策实践风险国家竞争局批准可持续性协议的决定对另一个国家竞争局没有约束力,而协议可能产生效果的领土内则有争议。这就意味着由第二次NCA裁量权批准或拒绝争议协议中的可持续性考量万博体育app手机登录因此,委员会与国家竞争主管机构之间的互动似乎至关重要,因此应当加强。
Overall,鉴于决策实践不足,仍需要欧盟和国家一级的更多指导。竞争自评在这方面很重要,当公司制定可持续战略时,法律咨询是关键Covington团队准备提供此建议
On January 6th, the White House Council of Environmental Quality ("CEQ") released a new Guidance on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change ("the Guidance") in permitting decisions, with significant implications for energy and infrastructure projects. Though this Guidance is effective as of the date of publication, it was issued on an interim basis and CEQ will consider comments until March 10th, after which it could be revised further.
CEQ's recommendations will influence the Biden Administration's analysis of greenhouse gas ("GHG") emissions in environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA"), applying immediately to all newly proposed actions as well as some on-going NEPA reviews. While the Guidance is largely framed as a series of recommendations rather than requirements, it highlights best practices for environmental reviews that could help expedite project completions, improve agency decision making, and minimize litigation risks for developers.万博体育app手机登录归根结底,CEQ正努力确保机构和项目开发商充分关注气候影响,不无端延迟机构决策,特别是考虑到加速清洁能源基础设施是Biden爱慕气候议程的一个关键部分。
指南力求加深理解温室气体影响和替代物取舍,从而提高对联邦温室气体分析质量的期望。 项目开发商希望与联邦监管商密切合作,确保NEPA机构审查的充足性。万博体育app手机登录失败可能为项目反对者提供诉讼路径 。
Below万博体育app手机登录Encouraging Consistency in Agency Analysis of GHGs
CEQ's Guidance builds upon an earlier 2016 policy document, and is the latest in a series of efforts aimed at enhancing certainty in agency GHG analysis.[1] This Obama-era 2016 guidance was revoked and replaced by the Trump Administration,[2] and then ultimately reinstated by the Biden Administration in early 2021.[3] In the interim, court decisions have required some kind of analysis of project climate impacts under NEPA, without articulating clear generally applicable guidelines as to what level of review would be sufficient, thus resulting in uncertainty.[4]
CEQ is encouraging more certainty in addressing GHG consequences, while acknowledging that any such analysis must be conducted in a measured, proportional, yet thorough manner.CEQ实现这一点的主要方式是建议机构量化并联系相关温室气体影响
A万博体育app手机登录Quantifying GHG Emissions and Reductions
CEQ recommends agencies first quantify all reasonably foreseeable GHG emissions and reductions of a proposed action, any reasonable alternatives, and a no action alternative. In doing so, CEQ recognizes the unique nature of the climate emissions challenge, where the effects arise from a wide range of emissions activities. It thus notes, "NEPA requires more than a statement that emissions from a proposed Federal action or its alternatives represent only a small fraction of global or domestic emissions."[5] In other words, an agency is not absolved from analyzing GHG emissions because no single agency action has the ability to mitigate climate change on its own. Instead, an agency must recognize that adequate reforms will occur incrementally, and therefore analyze the emissions impacts of significant federal actions that contribute to, or remediate, climate impacts.[6] To do so, CEQ directs agencies to use tools that are commonly deployed by the private sector and government to quantify emissions.[7]
Using these tools, emissions increases and reductions should be quantified individually by constituent greenhouse gases, as well as aggregated in terms of total carbon dioxide equivalency. Additionally, where feasible, agencies are encouraged to represent the proposed action's annual emissions or reductions, especially when those emissions might vary over the life of the project.[8]
CEQ further instructs that agencies evaluate direct, indirect, and cumulative emissions as part of their environmental review. Among other things, CEQ notes that quantifying direct and indirect emissions "is generally essential to reasoned decision making."[9] Cumulative emissions are critical to consider given the nature of the climate problem, where detrimental effects flow from the accumulation of historic GHGs. Consideration of cumulative effects can be accomplished by summarizing and citing to the relevant scientific literature, as well as monetizing and contextualizing emissions as noted in the following section.[10]
Analyzing direct, indirect, and cumulative emissions is likely to be one of the most challenging aspects of CEQ's guidance to implement, and similar recommendations have already been the source of some controversy. For instance, in February 2022, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued a policy statement stating that for gas pipeline approvals FERC would review "GHG emissions that are reasonably foreseeable" including those resulting from upstream impacts—such as those tied to construction and operation of the project—and downstream impacts—such as emissions resulting from the combustion of transported gas.[11] Barely a month later, FERC re-designated this policy statement as a draft and invited additional comments after it garnered significant industry and political criticism.
CEQ attempts to tamp down such controversy by making clear that any analysis of GHGs should be bounded by principles of proportionality. They caution against "an in-depth analysis of emissions regardless of the insignificance of the quantity of GHG emissions that the proposed action would cause."[12] For example, "the relative minor and short-term GHG emissions associated with construction of certain renewable energy projects, such as utility-scale solar and offshore wind, should not warrant a detailed analysis of lifetime GHG emissions."[13] In order to further enhance efficiency and avoid duplicative efforts, CEQ expects that agencies will rely on and incorporate scientific and technical information on impacts from other, more expert, agencies, as well as international organizations and academic literature.[14]
B.Monetize and Contextualize GHG Emissions
Agencies should contextualize GHGs associated with a project after quantifying them. This can include monetizing climate damages using the "best available estimates" of the social cost of GHG ("SC-GHG") and placing emissions in the context of relevant climate goals and commitments.
The best available SC-GHG figure is currently in flux. Two years ago, the Biden Administration reconstituted an Interagency Working Group (IWG) on the SC-GHG, which issued an interim estimate of the SC-GHG in the spring of 2021. As detailed in a prior blog post, that estimate has been the subject of litigation and the IWG has yet to issue a final SC-GHG. More recently, EPA issued a regulatory document in the fall of 2022, which previewed a much higher SC-GHG than contemplated in the IWG's interim estimate.[15]
CEQ nonetheless notes that "in most circumstances" agencies should use the SC-GHG to analyze a proposed action and its alternatives. In doing so, the SC-GHG will empower agencies to make clearer comparisons of the GHG impacts of each action.[16] Monetizing emissions is particularly useful if: (a) the NEPA review monetizes other costs and benefits from the proposed action!替代物在不同时间或温室气体排放类型上有差异and (c) the significance of the climate impacts are hard to assess or not readily apparent without monetization.[17] Any such SC-GHG should be global in nature and utilize a discount rate that accurately reflects the harms climate change inflicts on future generations.[18]
Despite encouraging the monetization of GHG impacts, CEQ clearly states that "NEPA does not require a cost-benefit analysis where all monetized benefits and costs are directly compared." Utilizing SC-GHG to estimate the societal cost of GHG emissions does not create a requirement to do so.[19] However, if an agency considers a formal cost-benefit analysis appropriate, it is not prohibited from including or appending this analysis to its NEPA documents.
For any actions "with relatively large GHG emissions or reductions" or that "perpetuate reliance on GHG-emitting energy sources"—such as fossil fuels—agencies should explain how the proposed action and its alternatives would meet or detract from broader climate goals and commitments, such as federal or state goals or international agreements.[20] For example, agencies could discuss how the actions align with the U.S.机构应考虑使用更多语法或无障碍方法描述温室气体排放量,其中一些例子可包括使用“familiar度量法,例如家用每年排放量、公路上一定数车或加仑燃烧汽油平均量值”。 CEQ is also using this Guidance to encourage agencies to take actions that lower GHG emissions by building such considerations into the process. This underlines CEQ's desire to align government decision making with the Biden Administration's net-zero ambitions. Embedded in this approach is the hope that a more complete consideration of GHG impacts will lead to more climate-positive decision-making, even though NEPA does not require agencies to opt for the most environmentally friendly alternative.[22] CEQ provides advice on how to consider reasonable alternatives and mitigation measures that might address short- and long-term climate change effects, with the aim of promoting emission mitigations.[23] CEQ notes that agencies should also acknowledge the impacts of climate change on the proposed action (not just the impact of the proposed action on the climate) and embed considerations of climate adaptation and resilience into the formulation of the proposed action and alternatives.[24] CEQ also recommends evaluating reasonable alternatives that have lower GHG emissions, including technically and economically feasible clean energy alternatives to proposed fossil-fuel projects.[25] CEQ notes how "[s]ome proposed actions, such as those increasing the supply of certain energy resources like oil, natural gas, or renewable energy generation, may result in changes to the resulting energy mix as energy resources substitute for one another on the domestic or global energy market." CEQ encourages agencies to conduct a "substitution analysis" to understand how any energy project proposals will affect the resulting energy mix and GHG emissions. When doing this analysis, agencies should not assume that if any project does not go forward it will be replaced by one that generates identical emissions, such that net emissions relative to a baseline are zero.[26] Instead, agencies should conduct modeling that "accurately account[s] for reasonable and available energy substitute resources, including renewable energy."[27] By encouraging the consideration of renewable energy alternatives to fossil fuel infrastructure early in the NEPA process, CEQ is pushing agencies to prioritize permitting cleaner forms of energy, consistent with the Administration's broader climate policy goals. CEQ鼓励前方社区参赛,重点是考虑环境公义对温室气体排放的影响万博体育app手机登录One of the most effective ways to accomplish this, according to CEQ, is to leverage early planning processes to integrate GHG emissions and climate change considerations into the identification of alternatives to the proposed action, as well as any reasonable mitigation efforts. CEQ recommends that agencies use the scoping process to identify potentially affected communities and provide early notice of opportunities for public engagement, which is especially important "for communities of color and low-income communities, including those who have suffered disproportionate public health or environmental harms and those who are at increased risk for climate change-related harms."[28] Community engagement should begin in the scoping process and should recognize any unique climate-related risks and concerns posed by the proposed action. For example, CEQ discusses how "chemical facilities located near the coastline could have increased risk of spills or leaks due to sea level rise or increased storm surges, putting local communities and environmental resources at greater risk."[29] In these types of scenarios, agencies should meaningfully engage with affected communities in designing the action and selecting alternatives, "including alternatives that can reduce disproportionate effects on such communities."[30] Such early project engagement, before the contours of a project are fully fixed, can assist in improving project outcomes and building greater community-level support for a project. We will continue monitoring developments pertinent to NEPA reviews of energy and infrastructure projects in the coming months, including CEQ's final guidance on GHG analysis expected in March, and other efforts by the Biden Administration and Congress to reform federal permitting processes. [1] CEQ, Final Guidance for Federal Departments and Agencies on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and the Effects of Climate Change in National Environmental Policy Act Reviews, 81 FR 51866 (Aug.万博体育app手机登录2016年4月5日CEQ撤销2016年最终指南。CEQ撤销联邦各部门和机构在国家环境政策法评审中审议温室气体排放和气候变化影响最终指南,III.Up-Front社区参与环境公义
[7] Guidance at 1201-1202. CEQ keeps a list of these tools on their website. See CEQ, GHG Tools and Resources, https://ceq.doe.gov/guidance/ghg-tools-and-resources.html.
[8] Id. at 1201.
[9] Id. at 1205.
[10] Id. at 1206.
[11] FERC, Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Natural Gas Infrastructure Project Reviews, Docket No.万博体育app手机登录PL21-3-000, February 18, 2022.
[12] Guidance at 1201.
[13] Id.
[14] For instance, CEQ notes that "agencies may summarize and incorporate by reference the relevant chapters of the most recent national climate assessments or reports from the USGCRP and the IPCC" and encourages them to "engage other agencies and stakeholders with knowledge of related actions to participate in the scoping process to identify relevant GHG and adaptation analyses from other actions or programmatic NEPA documents." Guidance at 1208, 1210.
[15] Specifically, the February 2021 IWG estimates places the social cost of carbon at $51/ton, while the EPA in the fall of 2022 estimated the social cost of carbon at $190/ton. This larger estimate was derived in part by using lower discount rates.万博体育app手机登录See Supplementary Material for the Regulatory Impact Analysis for the Supplemental Proposed Rulemaking, "Standards of Performance for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources and Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil and Natural Gas Sector Climate Review," EPA External Review Draft of Report on the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases: Estimates Incorporating Recent Scientific Advances, EPA-HQ-OAR-2021-0317 (September 2022).
[16] Guidance at 1202.
[17] Id.
[18] CEQ further notes that in utilizing a SC-GHG, agencies should keep in mind that currently available estimates "may be conservative underestimates because various damage categories (like ocean acidification) are not currently included." Id. at 1203.
[19] Id. at 1211.
[20] Id.
[21] Id.
[22] CEQ itself recognizes that "[n]either NEPA, the CEQ Regulations, or this guidance require the decision maker to select the alternative with the lowest net GHG emissions or climate costs or the greatest net climate benefits." Id. at 1204.
[23] Id. at 1203.
[24] Id. at 1208-1209.
[25] Id.1205 id>#em>
Background
According to the FERC news release, the 2020 global supply chain attack involving the SolarWinds Orion software demonstrated how attackers can "bypass all network perimeter-based security controls traditionally used to identify malicious activity and compromise the networks of public and private organizations." Thus, FERC determined that current CIP Reliability Standards focus on prevention of unauthorized access at the electronic security perimeter and that CIP-networked environments are thus vulnerable to attacks that bypass perimeter-based security controls. The new or modified Reliability Standards ("INSM Standards") are intended to address this gap by requiring responsible entities to employ INSM in certain BES Cyber Systems. INSM is a subset of network security monitoring that enables continuing visibility over communications between networked devices that are in the so-called "trust zone," a term which generally describes a discrete and secure computing environment. For purposes of the rule, the trust zone is any CIP-networked environment. In addition to continuous visibility, INSM facilitates the detection of malicious and anomalous network activity to identify and prevent attacks in progress. Examples provided by FERC of tools that may support INSM include anti-malware, intrusion detection systems, intrusion prevention systems, and firewalls.
New or Modified Reliability Standards
The INSM Standards will apply to all high-impact BES Cyber Systems and medium-impact BES Cyber Systems with external routable connectivity, defined as the ability to access a BES Cyber System from outside of its associated electronic security perimeter.FERC拒绝为即将实现的标准设定执行时间框架,代之以指令NERC提交建议书时推荐执行期,因此责任实体实施INSM的最后期限可能是未来数年 。
规则下INSM标准必须:
- (1)解决责任实体开发CIP网络环境网络流量基线的需要;
- (c) Implementing measures to minimize the likelihood of an attacker removing evidence of their tactics, techniques, and procedures from compromised devices.
Feasibility Study
Within 12 months of the final rule, NERC must also submit a report that studies the feasibility of implementing INSM within medium-impact BES Cyber Systems without external routable connectivity and all low-impact BES Cyber Systems, which are not subject to the INSM Standards.
FERC has emphasized that the commissioned feasibility study should include a determination of:
(1) The ongoing risk to the reliability and security of the Bulk-Power System posed by low and medium-impact BES Cyber Systems that will not be subject to the INSM Standards!并
类表示's样式缩放'>(2)The European Commission is expected to present a Proposal for a Directive on Green Claims ("Proposed Green Claims Directive" or "the Proposal") within the next few months. Together with the Proposal for a Directive empowering consumers for the green transition through better protection against unfair practices and better information ("Consumer Empowerment Directive Proposal"), the Proposed Green Claims Directive would contribute to the EU's green transition towards a circular, climate-neutral and clean economy by creating a common methodology for the substantiation of green claims that concern the environmental footprint of products, services and companies.It would aim to reduce greenwashing and enable consumers to take informed purchasing decisions based on reliable information about the sustainability of products and traders.
If adopted, it is likely to significantly limit the environmental claims that businesses can make in the EU/EEA. Businesses may want to consider approaching the Commission to try to influence the final legislative proposal that it is expected to present by March 2023. Once the Commission presents its legislative proposal, businesses should consider proposing amendments to the European Parliament and Council.
Harmonization of the Rules on Green Claims in the EU
Currently EU law does not explicitly regulate environmental claims.万博体育app手机登录Instead, environmental claims are subject to the general rules of Directive 2005/29 on Unfair Business-to-Consumer Practices and Directive 2006/114 on Comparative Advertising. While the Commission and Member States have issued guidance interpreting these directives and their national implementation in the context of green claims, in practice there is a wide range of variations on the requirements for and enforcement against these claims among Member States. The Proposed Green Claims Directive is expected to create a harmonized set of rules on the substantiation of voluntary green claims applicable to all companies operating in the EU/EEA.
Covered Green Claims
The Proposal is expected to define green claims subject to the new rules as "any message or representation, including text, pictorial, graphic or symbolic representation (e.g., labels, brand names, company names or product names), which states or implies that a product or trader has a positive or no impact on the environment or is less damaging to the environment than other products or traders, respectively, or has improved their impact over time." The Proposal is not expected to apply to claims that cover aspects other than those related to the environment. For example, sustainability claims would only be covered if they refer to environmental sustainability (e.g., preventingbiodiversity loss).
The proposed rules are also only expected to cover voluntary claims made by companies in the context of business-to-consumer ("B2C") transactions. The rules would also not cover environmental mandatory labelling or disclosures under EU environmental rules.万博体育app手机登录For example, mandatory declarations under Proposal for Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation, or the requirements under the EU Taxonomy Regulation or the Proposal for a Regulation Establishing a Union Regulatory Framework on the Certification of Carbon Removals) are out of scope.
General Rules on Green Claims
The Proposal is expected to impose general requirements on the environmental claims that companies can make that will mirror those of the existing Commission's guidance. In particular, it will require that companies:
- only make environmental claims that have been substantiated through an approved methodology that meets specific criteria (see below);
- do not make a positive environmental claims where a product has both a positive and negative environmental impact. Companies may communicate the positive claim only if they also communicate the negative impact in a clear and understandable way. For example, if savings in water consumption lead to a notable increase in greenhouse gas emissions or to a negative environmental impact in another stage of the life-cycle of the product (e.g., CO2 savings at the stage of manufacturing leading to a notable increase of CO2 emissions at the use phase), both facts should be disclosed together with the claim;
- make available the information on the assessment on which the environmental claim is based, including (i) information on the product or activities of the trader subject to the claim, (ii) environmental aspects, environmental impacts or environmental performance covered by the claim, (iii) the methodology used, (iv) the underlying studies or calculations used to assess, measure and monitor the environmental impacts or aspects covered by the claim, (v) a brief explanation how improvements in environmental performance are achieved, etc. Access to this information may be provided in the form of a weblink, QR code or equivalent!万博体育app手机登录and
- review the accuracy of their environmental claims (and their substantiation) at least once every five years from the date of the underlying studies or calculations. In cases where there are circumstances that may affect the accuracy of the claim (i.e., when there are updates of the scientific methodology substantiating the claim), the environmental claim should be reviewed and updated immediately.
Methodology to Substantiate Green Claims
In line with current Commission's and Member States' guidance on environmental claims, the Proposal is expected to require economic operators to duly substantiate their environmental claims on the basis of a methodology that:
- is based on widely recognized scientific evidence, state of the art technical knowledge and takes into account relevant international standards. Where there is no recognized scientific method or insufficient evidence to assess environmental impacts and aspects, claims referring to such environmental impacts would not be allowed;
- assesses the environmental impact throughout the whole life-cycle of the product;
- takes into account: the product composition!素材制作从过程和产品使用中排出耐用性、可恢复性和生命终结性;
- asesse万博体育app手机登录and
- is regularly reviewed by a third party with a view to take account of technical and scientific progress and the development of relevant international standards as well as revised where necessary to reflect such progress.
The Proposal is expected to add a lengthy list of additional requirements with which the methodologies to substantiate environmental claims must comply. This is a significant departure from the previous, lighter requirements under the Commission's and Member States' green claims guidance. In this context, the Proposal links these requirements to the existing EU Product and Organization Environmental Footprint methods ("PEF" and "OEF"). Where a company complies with the Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules ("PEFCRs") for a product, the claims made on the basis of the PEFCRs are deemed compliant with the requirements of the Proposal.
Requirements Related to Comparative Environmental Claims
The Proposal is also expected to include rules on environmental comparative claims, namely, that:
- companies use the same methodology to assess the environmental impacts, aspect or performance of products or traders to which the comparison is made (e.g., where two traders make a claim on climate change, where one considered only direct impacts, whilst the other considered both their direct and indirect impacts, the results are not comparable);
- data used for the substantiation of the comparative claim must be generated or sourced in an equivalent manner to ensure their comparability (e.g., choosing indicators on the same aspects but that use a different formula for quantification makes comparisons impossible, and therefore, there is a risk of misleading consumers)!and
- the most significant stages along the value chain must be taken into account for all products and traders compared, etc.
If adopted, these requirements are likely to make environmental comparative advertising more challenging for companies. Product certification and testing is costly, and the proposed wording would in practice require companies to conduct head-to-head studies to be able to claim any comparative advantage. Broad, sector-wide claims based on publicly available studies would no longer be acceptable.
New Rules on Forward Looking Claims
The Proposal is also expected to introduce new strict rules on forward-looking claims (i.e., claims that suggest that a product, service or company will achieve specific environmental benefits by a certain future date).The Proposal is expected to require that claims related to the future environmental performance of a product, service or trader:
- be accompanied by commitments that include milestones to be achieved within clearly specified time frames (if a target set for 2030 does not include any periodic milestones, it is impossible for stakeholders, or the trader itself, to monitor whether they are on track and what are the challenges);
- indicate a baseline year for targets and the indicators reflecting performance in the baseline year and the year linked to the improvement set out in the claim (e.g., "50% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions compared to 2015" instead of "50% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions");
- not include actions or targets already achieved, etc.
Enforcement and Access to Justice for third Parties
The proposal is expected to introduce new and reinforced rules on enforcement against companies making non-compliant environmental claims. Member States are expected to be required to carry out a compliance monitoring:
- as part of their regular checks;
- in cases where they have sufficient reason to believe that an environmental claim presents a risk of infringement of the rules, laid down in the Proposal!或
- 响应.
CompanyAfter receiving a notification for non-compliance, companies would only have 10 business days to provide an answer. Where a trader does not provide a timely or satisfactory answer, enforcement authorities must require the trader to correct the non-compliant claim or immediately stop its communication. The trader will have to implement the corrective actions within 30 business days.
The Proposal is also expected to allow third parties to submit complaints against non-compliant green claims before administrative authorities, and thereafter courts, if the third parties have sufficient interest or have the rights infringed. Such complains may lead to injunctive actions, including the immediate stop of the communication of the non-compliant claims.
Next Steps
The European Commission is expected to formally present its proposed Green Claims Directive by the end of March 2023. Once presented, the European Parliament and Council will consider the Proposal for adoption through the ordinary legislative procedure. This process will allow for the introduction of amendments and will take at least 18 months. As indicated above, industry should keep a close eye on the development of this proposal as the requirements it will impose will have a significant impact on the current practices.
Congress, the media, and the public have given significant attention to remarks this week by a commissioner of the Consumer Product Safety Commission ("CPSC") indicating that the agency would be considering a federal ban on gas stoves due to their health effects. The suggestion of a ban on gas stoves has drawn comments from bipartisan policymakers in both chambers, and even the White House has weighed in against the prospect of a potential ban.
The CPSC is unlikely to ban gas stoves in the near future, although it has the authority to ban unreasonably dangerous products that cannot be made safe, and has done so with toxic substances in children's products and other product categories in the past. A CPSC rulemaking on mandatory safety standards for gas stoves, however, is a possibility, and that process may drive the establishment of voluntary industry standards by a standards-setting body. Additionally, other federal and state regulators have recently sharpened their focus on indoor air quality and gas-powered appliances, for both health and environmental reasons. The Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"), for instance, is undertaking several activities related to indoor air quality. And the California Air Resources Board ("CARB") recently adopted a plan that would effectively prohibit the sale of gas-powered space and water heaters in California by 2030.
Particularly with regard to federal regulatory activity on gas stoves and other gas-powered appliances, potentially affected parties will have ample opportunities to help shape the outcome of any mandatory or voluntary product standards put in place or accepted by the CPSC, and to engage with other regulators. This alert provides an overview of recent and emerging legislative and regulatory activity related to indoor air pollution, focusing particularly on activity by the CPSC and EPA. Companies—both those with interests in gas stoves and those concerned with indoor air quality issues more broadly—should carefully follow indoor air quality developments, including in their interactions with regulators, given the increased focus on this area.
Consumer Product Safety Commission
The Consumer Product Safety Act ("CPSA") tasks the CPSC with regulating the safety of consumer products, which the statute broadly defines as products sold or used by consumers. The CPSA exempts from CPSC jurisdiction most items subject to regulation by another federal agency, including food, drugs, tobacco, pesticides, motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment, and firearms.The CPSC has five commissioners and is bipartisan by statute, although one seat is currently vacant.
The CPSC has the power to promulgate product safety standards that are "reasonably necessary to eliminate or reduce an unreasonable risk of injury associated with such product." The public, including industry, may offer written comments in a CPSC rulemaking on product safety standards, and the CPSC must "give interested persons an opportunity for the oral presentation of data, views, or arguments." Additionally, if the agency receives a submission of a voluntary safety standard and determines that the standard is "likely to result in the elimination or adequate reduction of the risk of injury" and that "it is likely that there will be substantial compliance with such standard," it must terminate the rulemaking and rely on the voluntary standard.
The CPSC faces a relatively high bar to implementing a mandatory safety standard, including the requirement that it make a finding that "the rule imposes the least burdensome requirement which prevents or adequately reduces the risk of injury for which the rule is being promulgated." There is an even higher bar for banning a product, which requires a finding that there is "no feasible consumer product safety standard [that] would adequately protect the public from the unreasonable risk of injury associated with such product." Both mandatory standards and a ban could be challenged in federal court, and most courts considering CPSC mandatory standards or bans have subjected the agency's required findings to stringent scrutiny.
Although Commissioner Trumka's recent remarks gained attention due to his reference to a potential ban on gas stoves, the adoption of voluntary or mandatory standards is a more likely outcome. There is a clear CPSC interest in the topic. The agency's fiscal year 2023 operating plan includes as a priority a focus on "chronic hazards, including hazards associated with ...万博体育app手机登录gas stoves" and sets a target date of March 1, 2023, for agency staff to provide a plan to the commissioners for seeking public input on the topic. In considering the operating plan, the Commission unanimously accepted, as part of a larger manager's amendment, Commissioner Boyle's addition of "chronic hazards" to the agency's priorities. During that meeting, Commissioner Trumka offered an amendment to begin rulemaking on standards for gas stoves, but he withdrew that amendment due to lack of support. The instruction to begin seeking public input on gas stoves was a fallback, which the Commission adopted unanimously.
The agency is also facing congressional pressure to begin promulgating safety standards for gas stoves. In December, on the same day that a study was published indicating that gas stoves may be a major cause of childhood asthma, a group of House and Senate Democrats wrote the CPSC to urge the agency to begin a rulemaking to address health risks from gas stoves. The letter included a focus on the impacts of indoor air quality on vulnerable populations, which is consistent with the priority listed in the CPSC fiscal year 2023 operating plan to "enhance agency data collection and analysis of product safety incidents, injuries, and deaths to identify vulnerable populations" and to "allocate safety work to better address any existing safety disparities among such identified vulnerable populations."
Environmental Protection Agency
The EPA has also shown a growing interest in indoor air quality, including related to emissions from gas-powered appliances. The EPA has expansive statutory authority to research, but not regulate, indoor air quality issues under the Radon Gas and Indoor Air Quality Research Act of 1986. Despite lacking authority to regulate in this area, the EPA's research can be authoritative and lead to regulatory and legislative activity and industry scrutiny. For example, the EPA's 1993 report on the risks of secondhand smoke exposure influenced public understanding of the dangers of secondhand smoke and the subsequent proliferation of smoke-free laws. A recently published report by the National Academies of Sciences, sponsored in part by the EPA, stressed the importance of issues relating to indoor chemicals, and the effect of these chemicals on air quality and human health.
As part of its efforts on indoor air quality, EPA has also become involved with indoor air quality sensor technology. Most notably, the EPA recently published guidance on the benefits and limitations of low-cost air quality monitors. While noting that air quality monitors may be helpful in measuring indoor pollution, the EPA also cautioned consumers that there is limited information as to the accuracy of these monitors and noted that there is "currently no widely accepted air concentration limits for most pollutants indoor." The guidance also reflects increased concerns about indoor air pollution, including from stoves, stating that "[i]n some instances, you may wish to use one or more monitors to compare pollutant levels or environmental factors before, during, and after an activity like cooking." The development of indoor air quality monitors may be significant to providing alternatives to simply banning products, by providing consumers with information they can use to respond to indoor air quality issues. Similarly, enhanced research regarding indoor air pollution may provide greater clarity about pollutant levels of concern indoors.
The EPA also has jurisdiction under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act over air-cleaning devices if device claims include pest or other micro-organism mitigation (e.g., air filters, air purifiers). The agency has significantly increased its focus on these devices due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and we can expect a continued concern with indoor air quality issues to result in continued EPA engagement regarding this category of products.
As additional evidence of the agency's interest in these issues, the EPA published a request for information in October 2022, seeking input on "actions, strategies, tools and approaches that support ventilation, filtration and air cleaning improvements, and other actions" to promote indoor air quality, with a focus on reducing disease transmission indoors. The request for information was prompted, in part, by the Biden Administration's Clean Air in Buildings Challenge, which calls on building owners and operators to improve indoor air quality and reduce the spread of COVID-19.
Finally, in exercising its authority to address outdoor air pollution, the EPA may affect indoor appliances and indoor air quality. For example, in August 2022 environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, petitioned the EPA to list heating appliances (including indoor appliances such as space heaters, gas stoves, and dryers) as a source category under the Clean Air Act and to issue performance standards.
State and Local Legislation
State and local regulators and legislative bodies have also engaged in activity related to gas-powered appliances.In addition to the California Air Resources Board plan that would effectively prohibit the sale of gas-powered space and water heaters in California by 2030, amendments to the state's building code that strengthened ventilation standards and established requirements for single-family homes to be ready for electric appliances went into effect on January 1. The Los Angeles prohibition on gas appliances in new buildings will be effective this month, and in November 2022, the largest county in Maryland passed a law requiring all new construction to be fully electric by the end of 2026. Numerous other local governments have enacted their own gas bans, although there is currently ongoing litigation regarding whether these gas bans may be preempted under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act. Additionally, these gas bans have prompted backlash from some state governments. As of June 2022, 20 states have passed legislation prohibiting local communities from enacting gas bans, and legislators in states where such "preemption legislation" failed may try again in the coming year.
Product manufacturers, retailers, and consumers can expect continued state and local legislative activity on gas appliances in 2023. For example, New York's Climate Action Council plan, passed in December, contains recommendations for implementing New York's 2019 Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act. The plan calls for making buildings more energy efficient through a mix of adopting zero-emission building codes and standards and providing incentives to transition to energy efficient appliances. Cities such as Denver and Eugene, Oregon, are also considering bans on natural gas in new residential buildings.
Non-Governmental Organizations
Non-governmental organizations are likely to continue advocating for regulation of gas-fueled appliances and indoor air quality. For example, a 2022 study conducted by the U.S.公众兴趣研究集团教育基金和Sierra俱乐部发现,消费者在各零售商购物可能无法了解与燃气炉和通风需求相关的健康风险,此外,2022年6月,美国医学协会传递了
Opportunities for Companies
Clearly, indoor air quality concerns are not going away, and we expect continued regulatory and policymaking focus on these issues. Companies selling products that may contribute to indoor air quality issues should consider monitoring these developments, participating in rulemaking and legislative processes, and proactively taking steps to evaluate and mitigate any indoor air quality risks (e.g., enhanced ventilation, monitoring), and develop a legal and regulatory strategy. Others may want to consider both the benefits and the risks associated with providing air-cleaning and air-monitoring technologies to consumers, which will continue to be an area of significant regulatory and legislative focus.
If you have any questions concerning the material discussed in this post, please contact the authors.
Notice 2023-9, "Section 45W Commercial Clean Vehicles and Incremental Cost for 2023"
Concurrent with the white paper and Notice 2023-1, discussed in a separate blog, on December 29, 2022, the IRS released Notice 2023-9, which provides a safe harbor for determining the incremental cost of qualified commercial clean vehicles for the section 45W credit.
The amount of the commercial clean vehicle credit under section 45W is the lesser of (1) 30 percent of the taxpayer's basis in a vehicle if the vehicle is not powered by a gasoline or diesel internal combustion engine (or else 15 percent) or (2) the incremental cost of the vehicle.第45W节信用额上限为7 500美元(车辆总重量级小于14 000磅的车辆)或40 000美元(车辆总重量级小于14 000磅或以上的车辆)。
GVWR小于14 000磅的所有其他街车,纳税人可使用7 500美元增支成本
Continue Reading…
Notice 2023-1 which provides proposed definitions of certain terms relevant for the section 30D credit.
White Paper on "Anticipated Direction of Forthcoming Proposed Guidance on Critical Mineral and Battery Component Value Calculations for the New Clean Vehicle Credit"
As described in more detail below, to determine if a vehicle satisfies the critical mineral and battery component requirements, one must determine (1) if a threshold percentage of the value of the critical minerals in a vehicle's battery is extracted or processed in the United States or "free trade agreement" partner countries or recycled in North America and (2) if a threshold percentage of the value of the vehicle's battery components is manufactured or assembled in North America.
Generally, to determine the value of critical minerals and battery components, the white paper provides that manufacturers must use the arm's length price that was paid or would be paid by an unrelated purchaser using the transfer pricing principles of Internal Revenue Code Section 482.为了确定临界矿产品值,制造商可选择关键矿产品最终处理或回收步骤前后的任何日期,但该日期必须应用到电池内所有材料上。判定电池组件值时,制造商可选择电池组件最终制造或组装步骤前后的任何日期,但日期必须应用到电池内所有电池组件中万博体育app手机登录For each of the critical minerals and the battery component percentage calculations, the manufacturer may average the percentage calculations over a period of time with respect to vehicles from the same model line, plant, class, or some combination thereof for vehicles, the final assembly of which occurs in North America.
Critical Minerals Requirement
The section 30D credit requires that, for any EV placed in service in 2023 (after the publication of proposed guidance expected in March 2023), 40 percent of the value of the critical minerals in the EV's battery must be either extracted or processed in the United States or in any country with which the United States has a free trade agreement (FTA) in effect, or recycled in North America.万博体育app手机登录2024年增加50%,2025年增加60%,2026年增加70%,2026年后增加80%。
白皮书与第30D节相关介绍以下两大类采购链: Free Trade Agreement Guidance The FTA requirement has drawn substantial criticism from some European and Asian trading partners with significant EV manufacturing operations as being an unreasonable restriction on trade.U.S.万博体育app手机登录domestic manufacturers have also expressed general concerns regarding the availability of adequate supply of critical minerals from FTA partners. Yielding to those concerns, the white paper notes that the term "free trade agreement" is not defined in the Inflation Reduction Act. Accordingly, Treasury and the IRS expect to seek comment in the proposed guidance on what criteria should be used to identify free trade agreements for purposes of the critical mineral requirement. Proposed criteria may include whether an agreement reduces or eliminates trade barriers on a preferential basis, commits the parties to refrain from imposing new trade barriers, establishes high-standard disciplines in key areas affecting trade (such as core labor and environmental protections), and/or reduces or eliminates restrictions on exports or commits the parties to refrain from imposing such restrictions, including for the critical minerals contained in electric vehicle batteries. Application of these or other criteria may broaden the universe of countries available to source critical minerals beyond the list of 20 countries with which the United States currently has a comprehensive trade agreement. Battery Components Requirement The section 30D credit requires that 50 percent of the value of an EV's battery components must be manufactured or assembled in North America if the EV is placed in service in 2023 (after the publication of proposed guidance expected in March 2023).万博体育app手机登录This amount increases to 60% in 2024 and 2025, 70% in 2026, 80% in 2027, 90% in 2028, and 100% after 2028. It is anticipated that proposed guidance will provide the following four steps for certifying that an EV meets the battery component requirement: The white paper also provides preliminary sketches of the following terms, although Treasury indicates it will supply more through proposed definitions of these terms in later guidance: Treasury clarifies that the constituent materials of battery components would not themselves constitute battery components (specifically, because constituent materials are produced by processing or recycling critical minerals, rather than through manufacturing or assembly).Importantly, because the incremental value of a battery component is determined by reducing the value of such battery component only by the value of other battery components contained in such battery component, this means that "the incremental value of battery components would include [i.e., would not be reduced by] the value of constituent materials contained therein." In the percentages calculation, this approach will have the effect of assigning significant weight to the location where constituent materials are first manufactured or assembled into a battery component—thus incentivizing industry participants to locate those activities in North America. And there will be the greatest "bang-for-the-buck" for locating in North America the manufacturing or assembly of the battery components with the greatest combined value of constituent materials plus manufacturing value-add. Notice 2023-1, "Certain Definitions of Terms in Section 30D Clean Vehicle Credit" For the section 30D clean vehicle credit, the final assembly of a vehicle must occur within North America, and a manufacturer's suggested retail price cannot exceed the applicable limitation, which depends on vehicle classifications.货车、运动公用车和小卡车的适用限值为80 000元MSRP,任何其他车辆的适用限值为55,000元MSRP万博体育app手机登录The notice provides the following new definitions to clarify key terms that appear throughout section 30D. Final Assembly Section 30D(d)(5) defines "final assembly" as "the process by which a manufacturer produces a new clean vehicle at, or through the use of, a plant, factory, or other place from which the vehicle is delivered to a dealer or importer with all component parts necessary for the mechanical operation of the vehicle included with the vehicle, whether or not the component parts are permanently installed in or on the vehicle." The notice provides the following additional guidance, explaining that a taxpayer may rely on either of the indicators below to determine a vehicle's location of final assembly:
1232fll和 (B) 制造商建议每件附属件或可选设备在向经销商交付时实际附属于该汽车的零售交付价,该价不在根据15U.S.C.所述这类汽车价格内1232/f)(1),见15 U.S.C.1232/f)(2).通知解释称,如15 U.S.C.描述的那样,该信息贴在车挡风玻璃或侧窗标签上1232. 第30D(f)(11)(c)节后通知称车辆的“车辆分类”必须符合40CFR600.002中为货车、运动工具车和小卡车提供的规则和定义。
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol ("GHG Protocol" or "Protocol")—a leading standard setter for measuring and managing corporate greenhouse gas emissions, borne of a partnership between World Resources Institute (WRI) and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD)—has opened stakeholder surveys concerning the revision of its Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard, Guidance on Scope 2 Emissions, and the Scope 3 Standard and Scope 3 Calculation Guidance.
The GHG Protocol's standards and guidance are a foundational element of the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi), which helps shape and verify corporate emissions reductions targets and ensure they are aligned with the goals of the 2015 Paris Agreement.协议是大企业首选碳核算机制:2016年92%以上Fortune500公司向CDP报告排放数据时,根据Hgorm协议会计标准这样做。万博体育app手机登录自2004年以来公司会计报告标准从未修订过,范围2排放指南-即自2010年代初首次发布以来与公司电热三维排放相关联的排放量从未修订过。
i2022年3月宣布利害关系方调查过程时,《温室气体议定书》宣布,“关键焦点将是通过重大披露举措确保与正在开发的核算规则相统一和一致..信息披露创举多多样,跨行业和司法权限,但关键共性在于依赖温室气体协议当前框架 。
,例如,美国证券交易委员会s/www.cov.com/en/news-and-inights/inights/2022/03/sec-proposes-landmark-climate-证交会在其提案中明确纳入并采纳了由《温室气体协议》开发的许多概念。
II万博体育app手机登录可再生能源证书作用2范围发布指南
A万博体育app手机登录RECs当前在2范围报告
Hrefss/default/files/Scope%2020Guidance_Final_Sept26.pdf>>当前2范围指导 (发布于2015年)为实体报告2范围排放量框架-即购买电耗、蒸气、热和冷却间接排放当前,实体可以通过定位法(基于实体地理区域平均产生能源排放量)或市场法(基于实体购买RECs的具体生成器排放物)报告CLE2排放量。
RECs是再生电源发布并出售给其他实体的工具,这些实体可能与直接购买电力合同捆绑或不可包绑万博体育app手机登录当前指南解释RECs销售传递可再生能源需求信号,这些信号驱动生产变化万博体育app手机登录RECs设计创建需求端市场信号,当前指南不要求实体证明RECs额外性也就是说,实体无需证明将排减纳入REC兆瓦本不会实现万博体育app手机登录数个其他报告机制,如英国绿楼理事会净零碳建框架,包含 这一额外性需求协议正考虑改变RECs
A部分修改中,协议似乎在重新评估是否和如何计算RECs协议2022年3月公告宣布由Anders Bjorn研究范围2,夏季Bjorn 二大建议 For each of these fifteen categories, the Guidance prescribes a time boundary to account for all emissions related to the entity's activities in the reporting year, even if those emissions occurred in a prior year or are expected to occur in a future year.万博体育app手机登录计算指南还就每一类别规定了一套专用计算排放法。万博体育app手机登录举例说,购买商品和服务产生的排放可用供应商专用法报告(有特定供应商提供的数据)、混合法报告(有某些供应商提供的数据和二级信息补缺)、平均数据法报告(有货物质量和平均排放因子数据)或开支法报告(有货物经济值和平均排放因子数据) C拟议的改变将显著效果报告2排放
Upstream Downstream emissions from purchased goods and services downstream transportation and distribution capital goods processing of sold products fuel- and energy-related activities (not included in scope 1 or scope 2) use of sold products upstream transportation and distribution end-of-life treatment of sold products waste generated in operations downstream leased assets business travel franchises employee commuting investments upstream leased assets IVsites/default/files/mocket-bases%20Survey%20Memo.pdf如上所述,基于市场的核算方法涉及使用合同工具或抵减信用量测量排放量性能,而《温室气体议定书》允许这些方法处理范围2排放问题。万博体育app手机登录然而,当前指南不包括基于市场报告直接(范围1)或供应链排放(范围3)的计算方法这份调查请求利害相关方反馈各种市场化计算方法-包括抵减信用额、嵌套信用额、供销棚/价值链干预、批量平衡认证和书籍填报证书-可能应用到范围1和3排放报告上。
V万博体育app手机登录公司应该从此难得机会生成碳规则
On August 16, 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) into law, directing a record $370 billion toward clean energy investments.
Yesterday, the White House released a 182-page guidebook to the IRA entitled Building a Clean Economy. John Podesta, Senior Advisor to the President for Clean Energy Innovation and Implementation, explains in his introduction that the guidebook "provides a program-by-program overview of the Inflation Reduction Act, including who is eligible to apply for funding and for what purposes." In the coming weeks and months, the Administration will provide further updates on www.CleanEnergy.gov.
See here for our post providing an overview of the major energy provisions in the IRA.