Geoscience and Policy Intersections

NOAA’s New Ocean‑Mapping Matching Fund: Partner with the Coast to Chart the Uncharted

Overview

The U.S. Department of Commerce’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has opened a matching‑fund opportunity—named the Brennan Ocean Mapping Fund—to bring non‑Federal entities into the planning, contracting, and execution of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes mapping projects. NOAA will match up to 70 % of a project’s cost, provided the partner contributes at least 30 %. The goal is to accelerate the acquisition of high‑quality hydrographic data that support maritime commerce, energy development, fisheries, tourism, and emergency response.

The program targets fiscal year 2028 mapping efforts, with projects expected to start between October 2027 and September 2028. NOAA will handle survey procurement, data quality assurance, and archiving at the National Centers for Environmental Information, ensuring that the resulting products are publicly available whenever possible. Partners benefit from NOAA’s expertise in survey planning, environmental compliance, and data stewardship.

Strategic priorities guide the selection of projects: filling gaps in U.S. ocean and Great Lakes bathymetry, advancing Alaska’s coastal mapping, and integrating emerging technologies into a coordinated national mapping framework. Eligible partners include state and local governments, tribal authorities, universities, NGOs, and private sector entities that can provide the required matching funds and demonstrate a clear need for the data.

Key Elements

• Matching structure: NOAA matches up to 70 % of project cost; partners must provide at least 30 %.
  
• Funding limits: Up to $1 million per project; NOAA plans to fund 2–5 projects in FY 2028.
  
• Timeline:
  
  • Informational webinar: Aug 13, 2026
    
  • Proposal deadline: Oct 16, 2026
    
  • NOAA decision: Dec 2026
    
  • Agreement drafting: Jan 2027
    
  • Partner fund transfer: Jun–Sep 2027 (must be in by Oct 1, 2027)
    
  • NOAA task orders: Jan–Sep 2028
    
• Data products: Bathymetry, side‑scan sonar, lidar, water‑column data, feature reports, and high‑resolution topographic maps.
  
• Public access: All data archived at NCEI and made available to the public to the greatest extent allowed by law.
  
• Strategic focus areas:
  
  1. Map U.S. waters deeper than 40 m by 2030 and shallower waters by 2040.
     
  2. Target Alaska’s coast to reduce costs and improve data quality.
     
  3. Leverage traditional and emerging survey technologies under NOAA’s Integrated Ocean and Coastal Mapping (IOCM) framework.
     
• Eligibility: Non‑Federal entities (state/local governments, tribal entities, universities, NGOs, private sector, philanthropic partners) that can provide the 30 % match.
  
• Submission requirements: ≤6 pages, executive summary, partner list, justification, budget, GIS files (SHP), PDF format, 12‑pt Times New Roman, single‑spaced, 1‑inch margins.
  
• Evaluation criteria: Alignment with national priorities, clarity of need, partner match feasibility, realistic budget, and likelihood of project success.
  
• Contact: Meredith Westington, NOAA Integrated Ocean and Coastal Mapping, 505‑278‑9851.

Charting the Ocean Economy: NOAA Extends Survey of Ocean‑Tech Businesses

Overview
The U.S. Department of Commerce, through NOAA’s Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) Office, is extending a web‑based survey that tracks the “Ocean Enterprise” – businesses and organizations that provide services, infrastructure, or value‑added products for ocean measurement, observation, and forecasting. The survey, conducted in FY 2015, FY 2020, and FY 2025, will be repeated to monitor growth and economic impact of the marine sector.

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, NOAA invites the public and federal agencies to comment on this information‑collection extension for 60 days before submitting it to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Comments are due by August 3, 2026, and will help NOAA refine the survey’s design, reduce respondent burden, and ensure the data collected is useful for policy and economic analysis.

The survey gathers demographic, financial, and functional data from approximately 300 business and non‑profit respondents, each expected to spend about half an hour completing the questionnaire. The resulting profile will quantify the size and economic contribution of the U.S. ocean‑related enterprise, informing future investment and policy decisions in ocean science and technology.

Key Elements

• OMB Control Number: 0648‑0712
  
• Purpose: Extend an approved web‑based survey of employers providing services or infrastructure to IOOS, and those adding value to IOOS data for specific end uses.
  
• Target Respondents: For‑profit businesses and not‑for‑profit institutions involved with IOOS.
  
• Estimated Burden: ~300 respondents, 0.5 hours each, no cost to respondents.
  
• Method of Collection: Electronic (internet) and via email.
  
• Legal Basis: Integrated Coastal and Ocean Observation System Act (2009) and reauthorization under the Coordinated Ocean Observations and Research Act (2020).
  
• Comment Period: 60 days; comments due by August 3, 2026.
  
• Contact for Comments: Adrienne Thomas, NOAA PRA Officer (OMB reference 0648‑0712).
  
• Contact for Information: Zack Baize, Program Manager, U.S. IOOS Office, National Ocean Service.
  
• Outcome: Data will be analyzed to produce a final report demonstrating the economic impact of IOOS data on the U.S. marine sector.

Georgia Power Eyes Safer, More Efficient Hydropower Spillway Upgrade on Savannah River

Overview

Georgia Power Company has filed a non‑capacity amendment with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to replace the existing flashboards at its Yonah Development hydropower plant on the Savannah River basin with modern Obermeyer spillway gates. The change is intended to give operators finer control over reservoir levels, improving operational flexibility and reducing the risk of uncontrolled releases.

The proposed upgrade will be installed behind a bulkhead, eliminating the need for any drawdown of the reservoir. Construction is slated to begin in 2027 and take 18–24 months, with staging areas located on previously disturbed, gravelled land. Because the work will not disturb new ground, the project is expected to have minimal environmental impact and will continue to operate under its current license and water‑quality certification.

FERC has opened a public comment period, inviting federal, state, local, and tribal agencies—especially those with environmental expertise—to submit comments, protests, or motions to intervene by June 29, 2026. The notice outlines electronic filing procedures and emphasizes that cooperating agencies cannot intervene in the proceeding.

Key Elements

• Project Location: Savannah River basin on the Tallulah, Chattooga, and Tugalo Rivers (Rabun, Habersham, Stephens counties, GA; Oconee County, SC).
  
• Amendment Purpose: Replace flashboards with Obermeyer spillway gates to improve reservoir elevation control and operational safety.
  
• Technical Details: Gates installed behind a bulkhead; no drawdown required; control room to house new instrumentation.
  
• Environmental Impact: No new ground disturbance; staging on previously disturbed gravel areas; expected to maintain current water‑quality certification.
  
• Construction Timeline: Start in 2027, 18–24‑month duration.
  
• Public Participation: Comment, protest, or motion to intervene deadline: June 29, 2026, 5 p.m. Eastern Time.
  
• Filing Instructions: Electronic filing via FERC eFiling; paper filings accepted; must include docket number P‑2354‑221.
  
• Agency Cooperation: Agencies may assist in environmental documentation but cannot intervene in the proceeding.
  
• Regulatory Framework: Governed by the Federal Power Act and FERC Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385).

Glen Hydroelectric Project: New FERC Filing Opens Door for Public Input on Run‑of‑River Power and River Health

Overview
The U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has accepted a hydroelectric application from Green Mountain Power Corporation for the Glen Hydroelectric Project on the Mascoma River in New Hampshire. The project is a 1,485 kW run‑of‑river plant that has been operating since 2012, generating roughly 2,782 MWh per year. The application seeks to continue the plant’s current operations while enhancing environmental safeguards, including a continuous minimum flow of 40 cfs (or the lesser of inflow) to the bypassed river reach and a compliance monitoring plan.

The applicant proposes several protective measures: a 20‑inch minimum‑flow pipe to maintain river flow, a ban on removing trees larger than 3 inches in diameter during the bat‑active season (April 15–October 31) to safeguard northern long‑eared and tricolored bats, and a historic‑properties management plan. In addition, the notice invites the public to submit motions to intervene, protests, comments, recommendations, preliminary terms and conditions, and preliminary fishway prescriptions as part of the environmental analysis process.

The filing is now open for public review and comment. Interested parties have until July 28, 2026 to submit motions to intervene or protests, and until September 11, 2026 to file reply comments. All submissions must be filed electronically through FERC’s eFiling system or via paper, and must reference the project name and docket number (P‑8405‑024). The Commission will consider all comments and motions when determining whether to issue a license renewal or modification.

Key Elements

• Run‑of‑River Operation – The plant will continue to operate in instantaneous run‑of‑river mode, matching outflow to inflow.
  
• Minimum Flow Requirement – A continuous minimum flow of 40 cfs (or the lesser of inflow) will be released downstream of the dam.
  
• Capacity & Generation – 1,485 kW installed capacity; average annual generation 2,782 MWh (2012‑2024).
  
• Fishway Prescriptions – Preliminary fishway prescriptions are solicited to support aquatic life passage.
  
• Bat Protection – No tree removal of trees >3 inches DBH from April 15 to October 31 to protect bat populations.
  
• Historic Properties Plan – Development of a plan to manage historic resources on project lands.
  
• Environmental Analysis – The application is ready for environmental review under the Federal Power Act.
  
• Public Participation – Comment, protest, and intervention deadlines: July 28, 2026 (initial filings) and September 11, 2026 (reply comments).
  
• Compliance Monitoring – Proposed operations compliance monitoring plan to ensure adherence to environmental conditions.
  
• Water‑Quality Certification – Required by July 28, 2026, either a certification, request, or waiver must be filed.

Chignik’s New Hydroelectric Vision: From License Surrender to Environmental Assessment

Overview

The City of Chignik, Alaska, has decided to surrender its existing license for the Chignik Project (Project No. 620), a hydroelectric facility that has been inactive since about 2012. With support from the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the Lake and Peninsula Borough, the city plans to replace the old water supply line and build a new hydroelectric plant under state jurisdiction.

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) staff have determined that the redeveloped project will not require a federal license, and a Notice of Application for Surrender of License was issued in March 2026. No comments were received on that notice.

In line with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), FERC staff will prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the proposed redevelopment, targeting a release by August 25 2026. The EA will be open for a 30‑day public comment period, and all feedback will be considered in the final decision. Public inquiries and participation can be directed to the Office of Public Participation or to FERC Secretary Rebecca Martin.

Key Elements

• License surrender: City of Chignik is relinquishing its 2012‑inactive hydroelectric license (Project No. 620).
  
• No federal license needed: FERC staff ruled that the new, state‑jurisdictioned project will not require a federal license.
  
• Project redevelopment: Replacement of the water supply line and construction of a new hydroelectric facility.
  
• Funding sources: Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and Lake and Peninsula Borough.
  
• NEPA compliance: An Environmental Assessment will be prepared and issued by August 25 2026, followed by a 30‑day comment period.
  
• Public participation: No comments were filed on the surrender notice; the EA will invite public input.
  
• Contact information: Office of Public Participation (202 502‑6595) and FERC Secretary Rebecca Martin (202 502‑6012).
  
• Unique document ID: EAXX‑019‑20‑000‑1777913740 for all related environmental review documents.

Oregon’s Storm‑Driven Disaster Aid: Presidential Declaration Amended to Expand Public Assistance

Overview
On May 28 2026 the U.S. Small Business Administration issued an amendment to the President’s major disaster declaration for Oregon, originally issued April 7 2026. The amendment broadens the scope of public assistance to include the counties of Clatsop and Wasco, which were identified as adversely affected by the recent severe storms, straight‑line winds, flooding, landslides, and mudslides that struck the state. The declaration remains focused on public assistance only, providing federal support for businesses and private non‑profit organizations to recover from the damage.

The amendment preserves all other provisions of the original declaration, including the eligibility criteria, funding mechanisms, and the authority under 13 CFR 123.3(b). It clarifies that the assistance will be available through the MySBA Loan Portal and outlines the relevant dates for application and disbursement. The notice also supplies contact information for the Office of Disaster Recovery and Resilience, ensuring that affected parties can obtain guidance and support.

For geoscientists, environmental planners, and natural resource professionals, the expanded coverage underscores the significant geologic and hydrologic impacts of the storm event—particularly landslides and mudslides—and signals federal recognition of the need for recovery resources in these vulnerable regions.

Key Elements

• Expanded Coverage – The amendment adds Clatsop and Wasco counties to the list of areas eligible for public assistance under the disaster declaration.
  
• Disaster Scope – Severe storms, straight‑line winds, flooding, landslides, and mudslides are the identified hazards triggering the declaration.
  
• Public Assistance Only – The declaration focuses on federal aid for businesses and private non‑profits; no private assistance is included.
  
• Funding Mechanism – Assistance is provided through SBA disaster loans available via the MySBA Loan Portal.
  
• Timeline – Amendment issued May 28 2026; key dates include December 15–21 2025, June 10 2026, and January 7 2027 for application and disbursement windows.
  
• Contact Point – Jennifer Talarico, Office of Disaster Recovery and Resilience, U.S. Small Business Administration, is the primary contact for inquiries.
  
• Authority – The amendment is authorized under 13 CFR 123.3(b) and references Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008.
  
• Unchanged Provisions – All other aspects of the original declaration remain unchanged, ensuring continuity of support for affected entities.

Cape Cod Canal Pipeline Relocation: FERC Opens Public Comment on Gas Line Move

Overview

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has released an Environmental Assessment (EA) for Algonquin Gas Transmission’s proposed relocation of its interstate natural‑gas pipeline system in Bourne, Massachusetts. The project is designed to accommodate the Massachusetts Department of Transportation’s replacement of the Bourne and Sagamore bridges while ensuring uninterrupted gas service to the National Grid distribution network on both sides of the Cape Cod Canal.

The EA, prepared under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), evaluates potential impacts on the natural and human environment, explores reasonable alternatives, and recommends mitigation measures. FERC concludes that approving the relocation would not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting environmental quality. The assessment is available electronically, and the public is invited to submit comments by 5:00 p.m. on June 29, 2026.

The project involves abandoning and constructing several miles of pipeline and installing new metering and regulating stations. Cooperating agencies—including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the EPA, and the Massachusetts Army National Guard—have reviewed the EA and will issue their own decisions under applicable statutes such as the Clean Water Act and the Rivers and Harbors Act.

Key Elements

• Project Purpose: Relocate existing pipeline segments to align with new bridge structures, maintaining continuous natural‑gas service across the Cape Cod Canal.
• Pipeline Work:
  • Abandonment of ~2.5 mi of existing 8‑inch and 18‑inch lines and two metering stations.
  • Construction of ~1.1 mi of new 8‑inch lines, ~0.66 mi of 18‑inch lines, and ~5.2 mi of larger 16‑ and 18‑inch lines to replace bridge‑attached segments.
  • Installation of four new metering & regulating stations and pig launchers/receivers.
• Environmental Findings: EA indicates no major federal action; potential impacts are manageable with proposed mitigation.
• Regulatory Framework:
  • Natural Gas Act (NGA) – public convenience and necessity review.
  • NEPA – environmental analysis and public participation.
  • Clean Water Act & Rivers and Harbors Act – waterway and habitat considerations.
• Public Participation: Comments accepted electronically (eComment/eFiling) or by mail; deadline June 29, 2026.
• Cooperating Agencies: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, EPA, Massachusetts Army National Guard – each will issue separate decisions on their jurisdictional aspects.
• Next Steps: FERC will consider the EA and public comments before issuing a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the relocation project.

FERC Signals Possible Closure of New York’s Ballard Mill Hydroelectric Plant

Overview

The U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has opened a proceeding to terminate the license of ECOsponsible, LLC for the Ballard Mill Hydroelectric Project on the Salmon River in Franklin County, New York. The action is based on an *implied surrender*—the licensee has not operated the plant since 2010, failed to respond to staff requests for a surrender application, and the Commission’s rules treat such inactivity as a voluntary relinquishment of the license.

The Ballard Mill is a small, 275‑kW facility built around a 200‑foot timber and concrete overflow dam that creates a 10‑acre reservoir. Although the plant was licensed until March 31, 2022, it has been dormant for over a decade, raising questions about its future role in local renewable energy supply and river ecosystem management.

Stakeholders—including federal, state, local, and tribal agencies, as well as the public—are invited to submit comments, protests, or motions to intervene by July 13, 2026. The outcome will determine whether the plant remains a licensed asset, is formally decommissioned, or is transferred to another operator, with implications for water rights, habitat protection, and community energy planning.

Key Elements

• Implied Surrender Basis: FERC’s Standard Article 16 treats prolonged inactivity and lack of response to surrender requests as a voluntary relinquishment of the license.
  
• License History: Original license issued in 1982 to Greater Malone Community Council, transferred to ECOsponsible, LLC in 2017, and expired in 2022; a minor license application was rejected in 2021.
  
• Project Specifications: 200‑ft timber/concrete overflow dam, 10‑acre reservoir (50 acre‑feet), two 275‑kW turbines, tailrace channel, and associated facilities.
  
• Operational Status: No operation since 2010; current annual license issued April 5, 2022, but no activity recorded.
  
• Public Participation Window: Comments, protests, and motions to intervene must be filed by July 13, 2026, 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time. Electronic filing via FERC’s eFiling system is strongly encouraged.
  
• Intervention Requirements: Intervenors must serve copies of their filings to all parties on the official service list and, if relevant, to resource agencies.
  
• Potential Outcomes: Formal license termination, transfer to another operator, or continued dormant status, each affecting local water management, habitat conservation, and renewable energy potential.
  
• Contact Information: FERC Online Support (866‑208‑3676) and Office of Public Participation (202‑502‑6595) for filing assistance.

Wyoming Oil Lease Reinstated: New Rental and Royalty Rates Boost Energy Revenues

Overview

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has announced its intent to reinstate the terminated competitive oil and gas lease WYW182309 in Converse County, Wyoming. The petition, filed on time by CNOOC Energy U.S.A., LLC and Chesapeake Exploration, LLC, meets all statutory requirements under the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920. No other leases currently affect the land, allowing the BLM to proceed with reinstatement.

The reinstatement will take effect January 1, 2021, and will include a two‑year extension under federal regulations. Importantly, the lessees have agreed to updated financial terms: a rental of $20 per acre (or fraction thereof) and a royalty rate of 20 percent on production. These adjustments reflect current market conditions and aim to enhance revenue for both the lessees and the federal government.

For stakeholders in geoscience, energy, and natural resource management, this decision signals continued federal support for oil and gas development on public lands, while also tightening economic terms to align with contemporary industry standards. The BLM’s action underscores its role in balancing resource extraction with fiscal responsibility.

Key Elements

• Lease Details: WYW182309, Converse County, Wyoming; terminated competitive oil and gas lease.
• Petitioners: CNOOC Energy U.S.A., LLC and Chesapeake Exploration, LLC.
• Reinstatement Authority: Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, 30 U.S.C. 188(e)(4); 43 CFR 3108.23(d).
• Effective Date: January 1, 2021, with a two‑year extension.
• Financial Terms:
  • Rental: $20 per acre (or fraction thereof).
  • Royalty: 20 percent of production.
• Administrative Compliance: Petition filed on time; administrative fee paid; BLM publishing costs reimbursed.
• No Conflicting Leases: No other leases issued that affect the land.
• Contact: Sandra Blackburn, Branch Chief, Fluid Minerals Adjudication, BLM Wyoming State Office.

EPA Eyes Simplification of Superfund Cost Recovery: Proposes Dropping Arbitration Rules

Overview

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued a proposed rule to rescind the regulations that require arbitration for small cost‑recovery claims under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), commonly known as Superfund. By eliminating these arbitration procedures, the EPA aims to streamline the federal regulatory framework and reduce administrative burdens for parties involved in cleanup cost disputes.

The proposal does not alter the underlying CERCLA law or the substantive rights of claimants and responsible parties. Instead, it removes a procedural layer that has historically directed small claims—typically those involving modest amounts of money—to arbitration panels. Without these panels, claimants will likely pursue resolution through EPA’s administrative processes or, if necessary, through the courts.

Stakeholders—including environmental lawyers, local governments, and communities affected by Superfund sites—will need to adjust to the new procedural landscape. The change could speed up the resolution of small claims, lower costs for all parties, and free up EPA resources for larger, more complex cleanup efforts.

Key Elements

• Regulatory Change: Proposed rescission of 40 CFR Part 304, which established arbitration requirements for small CERCLA cost‑recovery claims.
  
• Scope of Claims: Applies to “small” claims, typically those involving lower monetary amounts, though the exact threshold is not specified in the proposal.
  
• Simplification Goal: EPA’s stated objective is to simplify the body of federal regulations and reduce administrative complexity.
  
• Procedural Impact: Eliminates mandatory arbitration; claims will be handled directly by EPA’s administrative processes or through the judicial system if contested.
  
• Comment Period: Public comments are solicited until August 3, 2026.
  
• Submission Channels: Comments can be submitted online (preferred), by mail to the EPA Docket Center, or in person during business hours.
  
• Contact Information: Scott Mansfield, Office of Land and Emergency Management, EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460; phone (202) 566‑0174; email (not provided).
  
• Status: The rule is a proposed regulation; it has not yet been finalized or implemented.

EPA Proposes Streamlined Hearings for Superfund Claims

Overview

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued a proposed rule to revise the administrative hearing procedures that govern claims brought against the Hazardous Substance Superfund under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). The Superfund program is the federal framework for identifying, investigating, and cleaning up sites contaminated with hazardous substances. When parties—such as local governments, private landowners, or businesses—seek compensation for cleanup costs or damages, they must file claims that are reviewed through a formal administrative hearing process.

This proposal seeks to modernize and clarify those hearing procedures, potentially reducing delays, lowering costs, and improving transparency for claimants. While the specific procedural changes are not detailed in the announcement, the EPA’s intent is to make the process more efficient and accessible for all stakeholders, including geoscientists, environmental engineers, and natural resource professionals who often play key roles in site assessments and remediation planning.

The rule is currently in the comment period, which closes on August 3, 2026. Interested parties can submit feedback through the EPA’s online docket system or by mail, using docket ID EPA‑HQ‑OLEM‑2026‑2048. The EPA encourages public participation to ensure that the revised procedures adequately protect the rights of claimants while maintaining the integrity of the Superfund cleanup mission.

Key Elements

• Proposed Rule: EPA seeks to amend administrative hearing procedures for CERCLA Superfund claims.
  
• Purpose: Streamline hearings, reduce procedural complexity, and enhance transparency for claimants.
  
• Comment Period: Open until August 3, 2026; public comments are solicited to shape the final rule.
  
• Docket Information: Docket ID EPA‑HQ‑OLEM‑2026‑2048; submissions accepted online or by mail.
  
• Contact: Scott Mansfield, Office of Land and Emergency Management, EPA (phone: (202) 566‑0174).
  
• Implications for Geoscience & Natural Resources: Changes may affect how site assessments, liability determinations, and remediation plans are reviewed in administrative hearings.
  
• Regulatory Context: Part of 40 CFR Part 305, the rule aligns with broader EPA efforts to improve Superfund administrative processes.

SEC Eyes to Pull Back Climate Disclosure Rules: What It Means for Energy and Geoscience Sectors

Overview

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has proposed to rescind amendments that were added to its rules under the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Those amendments had required public companies to disclose climate‑related information in their registration statements and annual reports. By withdrawing these rules, the SEC would eliminate the mandatory reporting of climate risks, impacts, and mitigation strategies for all registrants.

For industries that rely heavily on geoscience data—such as oil and gas, mining, and renewable energy—this change could reduce the amount of publicly available information about how climate change affects their operations, supply chains, and financial performance. Investors, analysts, and regulators who use these disclosures to assess environmental risk would have fewer data points to consider, potentially altering investment decisions and risk assessments.

The proposal is currently open for public comment until August 3, 2026. Stakeholders, including geoscientists, energy professionals, and environmental advocates, are encouraged to submit feedback through the SEC’s electronic or paper comment channels.

Key Elements

• Rescission of Climate‑Disclosure Amendments: Withdrawal of the SEC’s rules that mandated climate‑related information in registration statements and annual reports.
  
• Affected Regulatory Sections: 17 CFR Parts 210, 229, 230, 232, 239, and 249 will no longer contain the climate‑disclosure requirements.
  
• Implications for Registrants: Public companies will no longer be required to report climate risks, impacts, or mitigation plans, potentially reducing transparency for investors and regulators.
  
• Impact on Geoscience & Natural Resource Sectors: Companies in oil, gas, mining, and renewable energy may see a decline in publicly disclosed climate data, affecting how their operations are evaluated in terms of environmental risk.
  
• Comment Period: Stakeholders have until August 3, 2026 to submit comments via the SEC’s online form or by paper mail, with all submissions referenced to File Number S7‑2026‑19.
  
• Potential Consequences: The removal of mandatory disclosures could influence investment flows, regulatory oversight, and the broader public understanding of climate-related financial risks.

Florida’s Myakka River Gains National Wild & Scenic Status

Overview

The Myakka Wild and Scenic River Act of 2025 proposes to add a 34‑mile stretch of the Myakka River in Sarasota County, Florida, to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. The bill builds on a prior study that found the river eligible for federal protection and follows Florida’s own state‑level designation and conservation efforts. By designating the river as “wild,” “scenic,” or “recreational” in specific segments, the Act aims to preserve its ecological integrity, scenic beauty, and recreational value while allowing for sustainable use.

The legislation emphasizes collaborative stewardship. The U.S. Secretary of the Interior will administer the river in partnership with the Myakka River Management Coordinating Council—a body that includes state, county, and local agencies, landowners, and nonprofit groups. Cooperative agreements will provide technical assistance, staff support, and limited funding, but will not convert the river into a National Park Service unit or allow condemnation of private property. Land acquisition is restricted to donations or owner consent, ensuring respect for private land rights.

Overall, the Act seeks to formalize federal recognition of the Myakka River’s natural and cultural significance, strengthen protection measures, and coordinate management across multiple jurisdictions, thereby safeguarding the river’s resources for future generations.

Key Elements

• Designation: 34 miles of the Myakka River in Sarasota County added to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System.
  
• Segment Classification:
  
  • 8.0 mi scenic (Manatee–Sarasota line to S.R. 72)
    
  • 11.2 mi wild (S.R. 72 to Laurel Road)
    
  • 1.9 mi scenic (Laurel Road to Border Road)
    
  • 1.5 mi recreational (Border Road to I‑75 Bridge)
    
  • 1.5 mi scenic (I‑75 Bridge to Snook Haven)
    
  • 3.2 mi wild (Snook Haven to Ramblers Rest)
    
  • 2.7 mi scenic (Ramblers Rest to U.S. 41)
    
  • 4.0 mi scenic (U.S. 41 to Charlotte County line)
    
• Management Authority: U.S. Secretary of the Interior, in partnership with the Myakka River Management Coordinating Council.
  
• Cooperative Agreements: With Florida DEP, local governments, and nonprofits; provide technical assistance and limited funding.
  
• Land‑Acquisition Limits: Only by donation or owner consent; no condemnation allowed.
  
• Comprehensive Management Plan: Adopted by the Council; satisfies federal requirements for a management plan.
  
• Public and Local Support: Demonstrated through state statutes, local ordinances, land‑use plans, and broad stakeholder endorsement.
  
• Protection Scope: Does not alter management of existing public or private lands within the watershed; respects existing Florida statutes.

Alaska’s Long‑Awaited Native Recognition Act Grants Land, Corporate Status to Southeast Communities

Overview

The Unrecognized Southeast Alaska Native Communities Recognition and Compensation Act (H.R. 41) seeks to correct a historical omission that left the five southeastern Alaska villages—Haines, Ketchikan, Petersburg, Tenakee, and Wrangell—without the benefits of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA). By authorizing the formation of “Urban Corporations” for each community, the bill provides a legal framework for these villages to receive land, share ownership, and economic participation in the same manner as the 17 regional corporations created under ANCSA.

The Act amends ANCSA to grant each village the right to enroll eligible Alaska Natives as shareholders in a new urban corporation, with each enrolled native receiving 100 shares of settlement common stock. It also establishes a detailed schedule for the conveyance of approximately 23,040 acres of federal land to each urban corporation, including surface and subsurface estates, while preserving public access for subsistence, recreation, and scientific use. The bill further ensures that existing land rights, statehood selections, and mineral leasing arrangements remain unaffected.

Beyond land and corporate status, the legislation creates mechanisms for settlement trusts, mutual use agreements for forest roads, and special use authorizations that allow guiding and outfitting activities to continue under new terms. These provisions aim to balance economic development, cultural preservation, and environmental stewardship for the southeastern Alaska Native communities.

Key Elements

• Recognition & Corporate Formation

  • Grants each of the five villages the right to form an Urban Corporation under ANCSA.
    
  • Provides a legal basis for village residents to enroll as shareholders.

• Shareholder Eligibility & Allocation

  • Enrolled natives receive 100 shares of settlement common stock per urban corporation.
    
  • Inheritance rules ensure continuity of share ownership for descendants.

• Land Conveyance

  • Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to convey ~23,040 acres of federal land to each urban corporation in phased parcels.
    
  • Includes surface and subsurface estates, with clear timelines and conditions for mining claim relinquishment.

• Public Access & Easements

  • Guarantees continued public access for subsistence, recreation, and scientific research.
    
  • Establishes procedures for reserving and terminating public easements on conveyed land.

• Mutual Use Agreements

  • Requires binding agreements between the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior for shared use of National Forest roads and facilities.
    
  • Ensures equitable access for both the urban corporations and the Forest Service.

• Settlement Trusts & Economic Development

  • Allows each urban corporation to establish a settlement trust to support health, education, and cultural preservation.
    
  • Proceeds from trust assets are earmarked for elders, minor children, and other beneficiaries.

• Legal and Administrative Safeguards

  • Maintains existing statehood selections, mineral leasing rights, and other federal land obligations.
    
  • Provides for escrow handling of proceeds from land withdrawals and clarifies the treatment of special use authorizations.

• Implementation Timeline

  • Sets a two‑year deadline (extendable by one year) for the final conveyance of surface land after incorporation of each urban corporation.
    
  • Mandates prompt entry into mutual use agreements within one year of incorporation.

These provisions collectively aim to deliver equitable land, corporate, and economic opportunities to southeastern Alaska’s Native communities while preserving environmental and public interests.

Inglewood’s Tiny Turbines: City Seeks Approval for 149‑kW Hydropower in Municipal Water System

Overview
The City of Inglewood, California, has announced plans to install a small hydropower system—called the North Inglewood Hydroelectric Energy Recovery Project—within its municipal water supply network. The project will house two turbines with a combined capacity of 149 kW, expected to generate roughly 928 MWh of clean electricity each year. By harnessing the existing water flow in its distribution conduit, the city aims to recover energy that would otherwise be lost, improving overall water‑energy efficiency.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has preliminarily determined that the project qualifies as a “conduit hydropower facility” under the Federal Power Act. This designation means the system meets specific criteria: it uses a man‑made water conveyance that is primarily for municipal water distribution, it does not exceed 40 MW, and it has not been previously licensed. Because of these qualifications, the project is exempt from the usual licensing process, allowing the city to move forward more quickly.

FERC is inviting public input on the preliminary determination. Comments, contestations of the qualifying status, or motions to intervene must be filed by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on June 29, 2026. The city and FERC encourage electronic submissions, but paper filings are also accepted. Stakeholders—including local residents, environmental groups, and industry experts—can review the docket online or request assistance from FERC’s Office of Public Participation.

Key Elements

• Project Scope: Two turbines, 149 kW total capacity, located in Inglewood’s municipal water system.
  
• Energy Output: Approximately 928 MWh per year, a modest but meaningful contribution to local renewable generation.
  
• Regulatory Status: Classified as a qualifying conduit hydropower facility, exempt from FERC licensing under §30(a)(3) of the Federal Power Act.
  
• Qualification Criteria Met:
  • Uses a municipal conduit (tunnel, canal, pipeline, etc.) not primarily for electricity generation.
    
  • Capacity below the 40 MW threshold.
    
  • Not previously licensed or exempted before August 9, 2013.
    
• Public Comment Window: June 29, 2026, 5:00 p.m. ET.
  
• Submission Requirements: Must include project name, applicant details, and comply with 18 CFR 385.2001‑2005; electronic filing preferred.
  
• Implications for Geoscience & Energy: Demonstrates how existing water infrastructure can be leveraged for renewable energy, offering a model for other municipalities seeking low‑impact, small‑scale hydropower solutions.

Edison’s Lee Vining Hydroelectric Project: Public Call for Input Ahead of Environmental Review

Overview

Southern California Edison Company has filed a new major license (Project No. 1388‑082) for its Lee Vining Hydroelectric Project, located on Lee Vining and Glacier Creeks in Inyo County, California. The application, accepted by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) on January 29 2025, is now ready for environmental analysis. The project comprises four dams, three reservoirs, and a 11.25‑MW powerhouse that delivers electricity to the regional grid while operating on 536 acres of federal land managed by the U.S. Forest Service.

The notice invites the public, resource agencies, and interested parties to file motions to intervene, protests, comments, recommendations, terms and conditions, and preliminary fishway prescriptions. FERC emphasizes electronic filing and sets clear deadlines: all submissions must be received by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on July 27 2026, with reply comments due by September 10 2026. The company states that no changes to existing facilities or operations are proposed, but the environmental review will assess impacts on water quality, fish passage, and surrounding ecosystems.

This process underscores the regulatory requirement that hydroelectric projects on federal lands undergo rigorous environmental scrutiny before any license is granted. Stakeholders are encouraged to review the application through FERC’s eLibrary and to participate in shaping the project’s environmental safeguards, particularly concerning fishway design and water‑quality certification.

Key Elements

• Project Scope: Four dams (Saddlebag, Tioga, Tioga Auxiliary, Rhinedollar) and three reservoirs (Saddlebag Lake, Tioga Lake, Ellery Lake) with a 11.25‑MW Poole Powerhouse.
  
• Location & Land Use: Operates on 536 acres of federal land in Inyo County, affecting Lee Vining and Glacier Creeks.
  
• Regulatory Status: Application accepted (Project No. 1388‑082) and ready for environmental analysis under the Federal Power Act.
  
• Public Participation:
  
  • Motions to intervene, protests, comments, recommendations, terms and conditions, and fishway prescriptions are solicited.
    
  • Electronic filing encouraged; paper filings accepted at specified addresses.
    
  • Deadlines: 5:00 p.m. ET July 27 2026 for initial filings; reply comments due September 10 2026.
    
• Environmental Focus:
  
  • Preliminary fishway prescriptions to improve fish passage around the dams.
    
  • Water‑quality certification required; applicants must submit certification or evidence of waiver by July 27 2026.
    
• No Facility Changes: Edison confirms no modifications to existing infrastructure or operations are proposed.
  
• Access to Documents: Full application available on FERC’s eLibrary; copies can be inspected at the Secretary’s office.
  
• Stakeholder Service: Intervenors must serve copies to all parties listed on the official service list and, if applicable, to relevant resource agencies.
  

These provisions guide stakeholders through the next steps of the licensing process, ensuring that environmental and resource concerns are formally addressed before the project proceeds.

U.S. Trade Office Launches Global Review of Dumping Duties on Metals, Fertilizers, and More

Overview

The U.S. Department of Commerce has announced the start of administrative reviews for a broad set of antidumping (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) orders that reached their April anniversary dates in 2025. The reviews cover key commodities such as common alloy aluminum sheets, steel threaded rods, phosphate fertilizers, and various chemicals, involving producers and exporters from countries including Bahrain, Brazil, China, India, and Morocco.

The purpose of the reviews is to reassess whether duties have been correctly applied, to determine if duties have been absorbed by exporters or producers, and to ensure that the U.S. trade regime remains fair and compliant with the World Trade Organization rules. The process will involve selecting respondents based on U.S. Customs data or self‑reported quantity and value information, and will allow interested parties to submit comments, certifications, and separate‑rate applications within specified deadlines.

These reviews are part of the U.S. effort to protect domestic industries that rely on imported raw materials and finished products, while also maintaining transparency and due process for foreign exporters and producers.

Key Elements

• Scope of Review:

  • Aluminum sheets (common alloy) from Bahrain, Brazil, Croatia, Egypt, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Oman, Turkey, Serbia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Taiwan, China.
    
  • Steel threaded rods and off‑road tires from India.
    
  • Phosphate fertilizers from Morocco, Turkey, and Russia.
    
  • Chemicals and activated carbon from China.
    

• Administrative Process:

  • Initiation notice published June 2, 2026; final results due by April 30, 2027.
    
  • Respondent selection within 35 days using CBP data or Q&V questionnaires.
    
  • Comments on data and respondent selection due within 7 days of data posting; rebuttals within 5 days after comment deadline.
    

• Duty Absorption Review:

  • Domestic interested parties may request a duty‑absorption assessment within 30 days of notice.
    

• Separate Rate Eligibility:

  • Exporters from non‑market‑economy countries must file separate‑rate applications or certifications within 14 days to qualify for individual examination.
    

• Certification Eligibility:

  • Companies that export both subject and non‑subject goods must apply for certification eligibility within 30 days if not already eligible.
    

• Factual Information & Extensions:

  • Five categories of factual information must be clearly labeled and certified.
    
  • Extensions for time limits can be requested but are generally untimely if filed after the established deadline.
    

• Geoscience & Natural Resource Relevance:

  • Aluminum production is a major energy‑intensive industry; reviews may affect U.S. aluminum manufacturers and downstream sectors.
    
  • Phosphate fertilizers are critical for global agriculture; changes in duties could influence U.S. food supply chains and environmental management.
    
  • The inclusion of chemicals and activated carbon touches on industrial processes that rely on mineral resources and energy inputs.
    

• Stakeholder Engagement:

  • Parties must file letters of appearance and comply with administrative protective orders.
    
  • The notice invites comments, data submissions, and clarifications to ensure a transparent review process.

NOAA Opens Public Review on Deep‑Seabed Mining Exploration in the South Pacific

Overview
The U.S. Department of Commerce’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has received a fully compliant application from American Deep Sea Minerals, Inc. (ADSM) for a license to conduct seabed‑mining exploration in the South Penrhyn Basin of the South Pacific Ocean, beyond national jurisdiction. Under the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act (DSHMRA), NOAA must publish a notice, allow public comment, and hold a virtual hearing before deciding whether to issue the license.

NOAA will accept written comments until August 3, 2026 and will hold a virtual public hearing on July 1, 2026, from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. Eastern Time. The hearing will be conducted via Adobe Connect, limited to 1,000 participants, and each speaker will have three minutes to present their views. Comments—written or oral—must be in English and will be recorded and transcribed for public access.

The application’s focus is exploration, not extraction, and it is the first step in a regulatory process that will evaluate environmental impacts, compliance with international law, and the potential for resource development. Public participation is a key component of NOAA’s decision‑making, ensuring that stakeholders, scientists, and the general public can influence the future of deep‑sea mining in this region.

Key Elements

• License type: Exploration license under DSHMRA for the South Penrhyn Basin, South Pacific Ocean (beyond national jurisdiction).
  
• Compliance: ADSM’s application meets all information requirements of the Act and its implementing regulations.
  
• Public comment period: Written comments accepted through NOAA’s Federal e‑Portal until August 3, 2026.
  
• Virtual hearing: Scheduled for July 1, 2026, 3–5 p.m. ET via Adobe Connect; up to 1,000 participants, 3‑minute speaking slots.
  
• Submission instructions: Comments must be entered with docket number NOAA‑NOS‑2026‑0892; oral comments require pre‑registration by June 29, 2026, 5 p.m. ET.
  
• Language requirement: All comments (written or oral) must be in English; non‑English submissions will not be considered.
  
• Transparency: Hearing will be recorded; transcripts and the public docket will be posted on NOAA’s website.
  
• No response during hearing: NOAA will not address questions or comments in real time; the hearing is for public expression only.
  
• Data access: The full application is available electronically; interested parties can review the materials before commenting.
  
• Regulatory context: The notice is issued under 30 U.S.C. 1426(a)(1), part of NOAA’s statutory duty to provide public notice and comment on deep‑seabed mining license applications.

EONY Generation Limited Seeks Water Quality Certification: What It Means for New York’s Waterways

Overview

On May 22, 2026, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) received a request from EONY Generation Limited for a Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 401(a)(1) water‑quality certification related to a new energy project. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has formally notified the DEC that the request is pending and that the DEC has one year—until May 22, 2027—to act on it.

If the DEC fails to approve or deny the certification by that deadline, the CWA’s certification requirement is deemed waived, allowing the project to proceed without the usual water‑quality safeguards. This mechanism is designed to prevent undue delays in energy development while still providing a statutory window for environmental review.

For stakeholders—including local communities, environmental groups, and the energy sector—the notice signals a critical juncture: the DEC’s decision will determine whether the project must meet specific water‑quality standards, potentially affecting riverine ecosystems, water supply, and downstream users.

Key Elements

• Request Origin: New York DEC received the certification request from EONY Generation Limited on May 22, 2026.
  
• Regulatory Framework: The notice cites 18 CFR 4.34(b)(5) and 33 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1) governing CWA water‑quality certification and waiver procedures.
  
• Decision Deadline: DEC must act by May 22, 2027; otherwise, the certification requirement is waived.
  
• Potential Waiver: A waiver would allow the project to proceed without meeting the CWA’s water‑quality standards, impacting environmental protection measures.
  
• Stakeholder Impact: The outcome will influence local water quality, ecological health, and compliance obligations for the energy project.

Savannah River Site Opens Doors: Community Advisory Board Meets to Shape Cleanup and Land Use

The Department of Energy’s Environmental Management Site‑Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB) will convene on July 21, 2026 to discuss the ongoing cleanup, waste management, and future land‑use plans for the Savannah River Site (SRS). The meeting, held in person at the Advanced Manufacturing Collaborative in Aiken, South Carolina, will also be streamed live on YouTube, allowing anyone to follow the discussion without registering. The board’s role is to provide community‑based advice on environmental restoration, excess facility disposition, long‑term stewardship, and budget priorities, ensuring that local voices help shape decisions that affect the region’s natural resources and public health.

This open forum is part of the DOE’s commitment to transparency and public participation under key environmental statutes such as CERCLA, RCRA, and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. By inviting written and oral comments, the board seeks to incorporate local concerns into its recommendations, which can influence federal cleanup strategies, waste disposal methods, and future land‑use approvals. The meeting’s agenda will cover updates from the DOE, program presentations, board business, and a dedicated time for public input.

Key Elements

• Date & Time: July 21, 2026, 9 a.m.–4 p.m. EDT
  
• Location: Advanced Manufacturing Collaborative, 4345 Trolley Line Road, Aiken, SC 29801 (in‑person) and livestreamed on YouTube
  
• Agenda Highlights:
  
  • Chair and agency updates
    
  • Program presentations on cleanup, waste management, and land‑use planning
    
  • Board business and future priorities
    
  • Public comment session (15 min total; 2 min per oral comment)
    
• Public Participation:
  
  • No registration required
    
  • Written comments due at least two working days before the meeting or within two days after; will be included in minutes
    
  • Accessibility accommodations available; request at least seven days in advance
    
• Contact Information:
  
  • James Tanner, Office of External Affairs, DOE Savannah River Operations Office – (803) 646‑2167 or email (contact details on the DOE website)
    
• Legal Context:
  
  • Board fulfills public participation requirements under CERCLA, RCRA, and related federal agreements
    
  • Minutes and agenda will be posted on the DOE website (www.…)
    
• Purpose:
  
  • Gather community input on environmental restoration, waste disposition, excess facilities, future land use, and long‑term stewardship at SRS
    
  • Inform DOE decision‑making and ensure compliance with environmental laws and public‑interest safeguards.

Charting the Future of Ocean Science: NOAA Seeks New Advisory Board Members

Overview
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has opened a call for nominations to its Ocean Exploration Advisory Board (OEAB), a body created under 33 U.S. Code § 3405 to advise NOAA leadership on the direction of ocean, marine, and Great Lakes science. The board shapes priorities for surveys and discoveries, develops a five‑year strategic plan, evaluates the proposal review process, identifies market barriers to new ocean‑mapping technologies, and sets best practices for data management and archiving. By bringing together scientists, engineers, educators, and policy experts, the OEAB ensures that NOAA’s initiatives reflect the breadth of its responsibilities.

The notice invites qualified individuals from academia, local, state, or tribal government, industry, non‑profit organizations, and other ocean‑related institutions. Selection is based solely on expertise and experience; race or sex are not considered. Members serve three‑year terms, renewable once, and serve at the discretion of the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere.

Nominations must be submitted within 45 days of the notice’s publication via email to the OEAB Designated Federal Officer. The application package requires a brief description of qualifications, industry perspective, and a résumé no longer than four pages. This process aims to infuse NOAA’s ocean exploration agenda with fresh perspectives and foster collaboration across sectors.

Key Elements

• OEAB established under 33 U.S. Code § 3405 to advise NOAA on ocean science strategy.
  
• Advises on priority survey areas, a five‑year strategic plan, proposal review quality, market barriers, and data‑management standards.
  
• Open to individuals from academia, government, industry, NGOs, and other ocean‑related institutions.
  
• Selection criteria exclude race or sex; focus is on expertise and experience.
  
• Members serve three‑year terms, renewable once for up to an additional three years.
  
• Nominations accepted via email to the OEAB Designated Federal Officer (Liz Tirpak).
  
• Application package: name, affiliation, industry perspective, qualifications, and a résumé (≤ 4 pages).
  
• Deadline: 45 days after publication of the notice.
  
• Contact: Liz Tirpak, OEAB Designated Federal Officer, email provided in the notice.

Reauthorizing the Integrated Coastal and Ocean Observation System: Strengthening U.S. Ocean Data Networks

The Senate has received and read twice the bill to reauthorize the Integrated Coastal and Ocean Observation System Act of 2009, now referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. The legislation seeks to extend and modernize the federal framework that coordinates ocean and coastal monitoring, ensuring that the United States maintains a comprehensive, high‑resolution data network for climate science, maritime safety, and coastal resource management.

Key objectives of the bill include updating the statutory language to reflect current institutional structures, expanding the scope of observation to explicitly include oceanic data alongside weather, and enhancing collaboration between federal agencies and regional coastal observing systems. By allocating a dedicated budget of $47.5 million annually for fiscal years 2026‑2030, the act provides the financial foundation needed to sustain and grow these observation capabilities.

Key Elements

• Reauthorization of the Integrated Coastal and Ocean Observation System Act of 2009, extending its mandate through 2030.
  
• Terminology updates: “Council” replaced with “Committee”; “National Ocean Research Leadership Council” renamed “Ocean Policy Committee.”
  
• Expanded scope: explicit inclusion of ocean data in weather-related sections and a new clause for conducting operational oceanography measurements.
  
• Regional collaboration: new requirement for Interagency Ocean Observation Committee agencies to develop processes for regional offices and federally funded projects to share data with regional coastal observing systems.
  
• Funding provision: $47,500,000 per fiscal year (2026‑2030) to support observation infrastructure, data management, and collaborative initiatives.
  
• Administrative adjustments: minor punctuation and clause re‑numbering to streamline the statutory text.
  

These provisions collectively aim to strengthen the United States’ ability to monitor and respond to coastal and oceanic changes, supporting scientific research, environmental stewardship, and economic activities that depend on accurate ocean data.

Geo‑Energy Opportunity Act (GEO Act): Fast‑Track Geothermal Development

Overview

The GEO Act amends the 1970 Geothermal Steam Act to impose a firm 60‑day deadline for the federal government to approve or deny geothermal leasing applications. The goal is to reduce the long wait times that have historically slowed geothermal projects, thereby encouraging investment and expanding the United States’ renewable energy portfolio.

The bill clarifies that pending civil lawsuits—such as disputes over land use or environmental concerns—do not automatically halt the processing of a geothermal permit, right‑of‑way, or other authorization. Only a federal court order that vacates or restrains the lease can delay the decision. Importantly, the act does not alter the courts’ existing authority to intervene; it merely sets a statutory timeline for agency action.

By requiring agencies to complete all necessary environmental reviews (including the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act) within the 60‑day window, the GEO Act seeks to balance rapid development with environmental stewardship. The legislation has been introduced by Representative Maloy and co‑sponsored by lawmakers from Nevada, California, and other states, reflecting broad bipartisan support for geothermal expansion.

Key Elements

• 60‑Day Processing Deadline – The Secretary must approve, deny, or otherwise decide on any geothermal leasing application within 60 days of completing all federal legal and regulatory requirements.
  
• Pending Civil Actions Do Not Delay – A pending lawsuit does not automatically postpone the decision unless a federal court issues a vacatur or injunction.
  
• No New Court Authority – The act does not expand or modify the existing powers of federal courts to vacate or restrain geothermal leases or permits.
  
• Definition of “Authorization” – Includes any license, permit, approval, or administrative decision required by federal law or regulation for geothermal projects.
  
• Environmental Compliance Remains Mandatory – All decisions must still satisfy the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, and relevant provisions of the U.S. Code.
  
• Broad Congressional Support – Sponsored by representatives from Nevada, California, and other states, indicating a national interest in accelerating geothermal development.
  
• Union Calendar Placement – The bill is currently on the Union Calendar (No. 568) and awaiting further congressional action.

Ukraine Support Act – A Comprehensive U.S. Response to the Russian Invasion

Overview

The Ukraine Support Act is a sweeping legislative package that authorizes a broad range of diplomatic, military, economic, and sanctions measures aimed at countering Russia’s aggression and supporting Ukraine’s sovereignty and reconstruction. The bill consolidates existing U.S. aid programs, creates new funding mechanisms, and expands the scope of sanctions against Russian entities and individuals. It also establishes a framework for long‑term cooperation on energy security, nuclear technology, and natural‑resource governance. The Act’s key thrusts include: Military and security assistance: expanded lend‑lease authority, direct loans, and support for Baltic allies; a special coordinator for Ukrainian reconstruction; and a Ukraine Reconstruction Trust Fund to finance rebuilding and economic recovery. Economic and trade measures: war‑risk insurance for Ukrainian shipping, a new insurance initiative, and a range of export‑control and tariff provisions targeting Russian oil, mining, and nuclear assets. Sanctions and export controls: a comprehensive set of sanctions covering Russian financial institutions, oil and mining companies, Rosatom, the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, and individuals involved in child abductions or the construction of a Crimea tunnel. Dual‑use export controls and a 500 % duty on Russian goods are also included. Information and media support: funding for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and a counter‑disinformation strategy to protect Ukrainian civil society. These measures are designed to deter further Russian aggression, protect U.S. and allied interests, and help Ukraine rebuild its infrastructure, economy, and democratic institutions.

Key Elements

- Diplomatic & Reconstruction - Establishment of a Special Coordinator for Ukrainian Reconstruction. - Creation of the Ukraine Reconstruction Trust Fund (funded by Russian sovereign‑asset taxes). - Authorization of a $250 M appropriation for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and a counter‑disinformation program. - Military & Security Assistance - Expanded lend‑lease authority and direct loans up to $8 B for Ukraine and NATO allies. - Support for Baltic countries’ defense capabilities. - Extension of the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative with additional funding for 2026–2027. - Energy & Nuclear Cooperation - U.S.–European nuclear energy cooperation strategy, including small modular reactors and fuel‑cycle options to reduce Russian influence. - Sanctions on Rosatom, the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, and any entities involved in the Crimea tunnel. - Price‑cap vessel sanctions and SWIFT restrictions targeting Russian oil transport. - Sanctions & Export Controls - Broad sanctions on Russian financial institutions, oil and mining companies, and individuals linked to war crimes. - Dual‑use export controls targeting technologies that could support Russian military or nuclear capabilities. - 500 % ad‑valorem duties on all Russian goods and a 100 % tax on Russian sovereign‑asset income. - Targeted sanctions on kidnapping of Ukrainian children and on North‑Korean cooperation with Russia. - Insurance & Trade Support - Vessel war‑risk insurance for U.S. and NATO vessels transporting cargo to/from Ukraine. - The Insurance for Ukraine Initiative to encourage private‑sector investment and secure grain shipments. - Reporting & Oversight - Regular reports to Congress on military contributions, intelligence cooperation, sanctions implementation, and the use of the Reconstruction Trust Fund. - Congressional review requirements for any changes to sanctions or export‑control policies. This Act represents a coordinated effort to strengthen Ukraine’s resilience, safeguard global energy and natural‑resource markets, and uphold international law in the face of Russian aggression.

Streamlining Oil & Gas Permits: The BLM Mineral Spacing Act Cuts Red Tape for Non‑Federal Lands

The Bureau of Land Management Mineral Spacing Act (H.R. 1555) seeks to simplify the oil and gas permitting process on federal lands. By amending the Mineral Leasing Act, the bill removes the requirement for a federal drilling permit when the United States holds less than 50 % of the subsurface mineral interest and the operator already holds a state permit. The legislation also clarifies that such activities will not trigger major federal actions under the National Environmental Policy Act, the National Historic Preservation Act, or the Endangered Species Act, and it preserves the existing royalty regime and audit authority of the Secretary of the Interior.

For geoscientists, energy developers, and natural resource professionals, the Act means faster project start‑ups and reduced regulatory burden on non‑federal surface estates. However, the federal government retains its right to audit production and collect royalties, and the provisions explicitly exclude Indian lands, ensuring that tribal sovereignty and related protections remain intact.

Key Elements

• No federal permit needed when the U.S. owns < 50 % of the subsurface mineral estate and the operator holds a valid state permit.
  
• No major federal action: activities are exempt from NEPA, NHP, and ESA reviews; they may begin 30 days after state permit submission.
  
• Royalties and accountability remain unchanged; the Secretary can conduct onsite inspections and enforce royalty payments.
  
• Exclusion of Indian lands: the rule does not apply to reservations, pueblos, rancherias, or trust lands, preserving tribal jurisdiction.
  
• Clear definition of “Indian land” to delineate the scope of the exemption.
  
• Streamlined permitting aims to accelerate development while maintaining federal oversight of production and environmental compliance where applicable.

EU Grants Spain €8.5 Billion to Offset Carbon‑Pricing Costs for Heavy Industries

Overview

In May 2026 the European Commission approved a state‑aid package for Spain, authorising direct grants of €8.51 billion to compensate companies for indirect costs incurred under the European Union Emissions Trading System (ETS) from 2021 to 2030. The decision, made under Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, was issued with no objections from the Commission, signalling that the aid is compatible with EU competition rules.

The aid is aimed at supporting environmental protection, energy efficiency and the transition to renewable energy. By covering the indirect ETS costs, the programme seeks to prevent a disproportionate financial burden on Spanish industry while encouraging the adoption of cleaner technologies and practices. The Ministry of Industry, Trade and Tourism will administer the grants, ensuring that funds reach the intended beneficiaries across a broad spectrum of sectors.

The authorised aid spans a decade (1 January 2021 – 31 December 2030) and targets a wide array of industrial activities, from aluminium and steel production to chemicals, plastics, textiles and batteries. The large budget reflects the scale of the ETS impact on these sectors and the EU’s commitment to balancing climate goals with economic competitiveness.

Key Elements

• Legal basis: Law 1/2005 of 9 March 2005, under EU state‑aid rules (Articles 107/108).
  
• Objective: Environmental protection, energy efficiency, renewable energy transition.
  
• Form of aid: Direct grants (no conditions beyond standard compliance).
  
• Budget: €8.51 billion overall, covering indirect ETS costs for 2021‑2030.
  
• Duration: 1 January 2021 – 31 December 2030.
  
• Beneficiary sectors:
  
  • Heavy industry (aluminium, steel, iron ore mining).
    
  • Non‑ferrous metals (lead, zinc, tin, copper).
    
  • Chemical and petrochemical production (basic chemicals, plastics, synthetic rubber).
    
  • Energy‑intensive manufacturing (glass, ceramics, textiles, paper, pulp).
    
  • Battery and accumulator manufacturing.
    
  • Other mineral and industrial gas production.
    
• Granting authority: Ministry of Industry, Trade and Tourism, Madrid.
  
• Commission stance: No objections, indicating compliance with EU competition and environmental objectives.
  
• Access to full text: Available on the EU competition cases portal (link provided in the decision).

Rivers Electric Seeks Approval for Catskill Creek Hydropower Expansion

Overview

Rivers Electric, LLC has filed a hydroelectric application with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for the Mill Pond Hydroelectric Project on Catskill Creek in Greene County, New York. The application, identified as docket P‑9985‑039, has been accepted for filing but is not yet ready for environmental analysis. The project is a run‑of‑river operation that will maintain a minimum flow of 20 cubic feet per second (or the lesser of inflow) throughout the year, in compliance with Article 402 of the current license.

The Mill Pond Project consists of a small concrete gravity dam, a 7.28‑acre reservoir, and a 1,000 kW power plant with two 500 kW units. Water is conveyed through a steel penstock and a concrete trough, and the generated electricity is stepped up to 13.2 kV before transmission to the local distribution system. The facility is designed to operate with minimal ecological disruption, preserving natural flow regimes and fish passage.

Public participation is encouraged. Commenters may submit up to 10,000 characters electronically via FERC’s eComment system, with a deadline of July 27, 2026. Motions to intervene and protests must be filed by the same date, following FERC’s Rules of Practice and Procedure. The Commission will issue a Notice of Ready for Environmental Analysis in November 2026, after which the project will proceed to the environmental review phase.

Key Elements

• Project Identification: Mill Pond Hydroelectric Project, docket P‑9985‑039, located on Catskill Creek, Greene County, NY.
  
• Application Status: Accepted for filing; environmental analysis pending.
  
• Technical Specs:
  
  • 3–5 ft high concrete gravity dam with 3‑ft pneumatic flashboards.
    
  • 7.28‑acre reservoir, 82 acre‑feet capacity, 108 ft msl water surface.
    
  • 1,000 kW capacity (two 500 kW units).
    
  • 10‑ft diameter, 147‑ft steel penstock; 36‑in concrete trough.
    
  • 2.4 kV generator leads to 13.2 kV step‑up transformer; 200‑ft transmission line.
    
• Operation Mode: Run‑of‑river; maintains minimum flow of 20 cfs (or inflow) year‑round.
  
• Public Participation:
  
  • Comment deadline: July 27, 2026.
    
  • Motions to intervene/protests deadline: July 27, 2026.
    
  • Electronic filing via FERC eFiling/eComment; paper filing accepted.
    
• Timeline:
  
  • Issue Scoping Notice: July 2026.
    
  • Scoping Comments due: August 2026.
    
  • Request for Additional Information: August 2026.
    
  • Notice of Ready for Environmental Analysis: November 2026.
    
• Contact Information: Rivers Electric’s regulatory compliance contacts (Allison Frechette, Jessica Antonez) and FERC support lines for filing assistance.
  
• Regulatory Framework: Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 791(a)‑825®); FERC Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385).

FEMA Extends Flood‑Proofing Paperwork: What It Means for Homeowners and Builders

Overview

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has announced a 60‑day extension of its approved information collection for the National Flood Insurance Program’s (NFIP) Elevation Certificate and Floodproofing Certificate. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, FEMA is inviting the public to comment on the necessity, accuracy, and burden of this data collection before it is renewed. The goal is to streamline the process while ensuring that floodplain management standards—such as elevating the lowest floor above the base flood elevation—are properly documented and enforced.

The certificates serve as official records that a building complies with local floodplain ordinances and that its elevation data can be used to calculate flood insurance premiums or qualify for discounts (e.g., Machinery & Equipment). They are typically completed by surveyors, architects, or engineers, though property owners may fill in portions. By extending the collection, FEMA seeks to maintain a reliable database for insurers and policyholders while exploring ways to reduce paperwork through electronic submissions and clearer forms.

For communities, developers, and homeowners, the extension means continued access to the NFIP’s tools for flood risk assessment and premium determination. It also underscores FEMA’s commitment to balancing regulatory oversight with efforts to lessen administrative burdens on those who must provide the information.

Key Elements

• Extension of Approved Collection – The Elevation Certificate (FEMA Form FF‑206‑FY‑22‑152) and Floodproofing Certificate (FEMA Form FF‑206‑FY‑22‑153) will remain in use beyond their current approval period.
  
• Purpose – Documents building compliance with NFIP floodplain standards and supplies elevation data for insurance premium calculation or discount eligibility.
  
• Respondents – Primarily surveyors, architects, and engineers; property owners may complete parts of the certificate.
  
• Burden Estimate – 3,517 respondents, 12,735 total responses, with an estimated annual cost of $680,316 (no cost to respondents).
  
• Comment Period – Public comments due by July 31 2026; submissions must reference Docket ID FEMA‑2026‑1666.
  
• Potential Improvements – FEMA seeks feedback on reducing paperwork, improving data accuracy, and enabling electronic submission methods.
  
• Regulatory Context – Aligns with 44 CFR 60.3©(2)–(3) and 44 CFR 60.6(b)–© floodplain management standards required for NFIP‑participating communities.
  
• Contact – John Hintermister (Underwriting, Resilience) and the Information Management Division for further details.

Indiana’s New Highway Plan: A Deep Dive into the Mid‑States Corridor Environmental Review

Overview

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), together with the Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT), has issued a Notice of Intent to prepare a Tier 2 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Section 2 of the Mid‑States Corridor (MSC) project. This section will create a new 23‑mile arterial road linking Interstate 64 at Dale to State Road 56 in Haysville, Dubois County. The Tier 2 study builds on the earlier Tier 1 Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and Record of Decision (ROD) that selected the Refined Preferred Alternative P (RPA P) corridor and divided it into five independent sections.

The EIS will evaluate the environmental, social, and economic impacts of the proposed highway, focusing on resources such as waters of the United States, wetlands, floodplains, wildlife habitat, cultural and historic sites, and mineral resources. It will also consider air quality, noise, and groundwater effects. Public and agency input has already shaped preliminary alternatives, and the draft EIS is slated for release in fall 2026, with a final decision expected in summer 2027.

Stakeholders—including tribal nations, local governments, and environmental groups—are invited to submit comments by July 1, 2026. The process will involve extensive public meetings, a detailed public involvement plan, and coordination with federal, state, and local agencies to secure necessary permits and approvals under the Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, and other relevant statutes.

Key Elements

• Project Scope: Construction of a new south‑to‑north arterial road (≈ 23 mi) between I‑64 and SR 56, improving regional connectivity and freight access.
  
• Environmental Focus: Assessment of impacts on waters, wetlands, floodplains, wildlife habitat, cultural resources, and mineral deposits.
  
• Alternatives: Screening identified Alternatives 2B and 3B for the Draft EIS; the preferred alternative will blend features from both.
  
• Permitting & Approvals: Required approvals include USACE Section 404, SHPO Section 106, USFWS Endangered Species Act, NRCS Farmland Protection, IDNR Flood Control, IDEM water quality certification, and NPDES permits.
  
• Public Participation: Three public information meetings (Sept 2024, Apr 2025, Oct 2025) and ongoing stakeholder engagement; comments must be received by July 1, 2026.
  
• Timeline: Draft EIS due fall 2026; combined FEIS/Record of Decision expected summer 2027.
  
• Agency Coordination: FHWA and INDOT will collaborate with federal agencies (USACE, USFWS, EPA) and state agencies (IDNR, IDEM, NRCS) throughout the process.
  
• Geoscience Relevance: The study will analyze hydrological changes, floodplain dynamics, soil and mineral resource impacts, and ecological connectivity, providing data critical for geoscientists and natural resource managers.

IRS Sets 2026 Inflation Factor and Wind Price to Keep Renewable Energy Credits Alive

Overview

The Treasury Department’s Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has issued a notice establishing the 2026 inflation adjustment factor and reference price for the federal renewable electricity production tax credit (Section 45). The inflation factor of 2.0570 and the wind reference price of 3.17 ¢/kWh are used to compute the credit amount for electricity sold in 2026 from qualified renewable facilities. Because the wind reference price does not exceed the threshold of 8 ¢ × the inflation factor, the phase‑out provision of Section 45(b)(1) does not apply to wind‑generated electricity sold that year. Reference prices for other renewable resources—closed‑loop biomass, open‑loop biomass, geothermal, solar, municipal solid waste, qualified hydropower, and marine/hydrokinetic—have not yet been set for 2026.

The notice also summarizes the impact of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 on Section 45. The IRA introduced bonus credits for small facilities, domestic‑content and energy‑community incentives, and modified phase‑out rules for wind, hydropower, and marine renewable projects. It removed the one‑half credit reduction for hydropower and marine facilities placed in service after December 31, 2022, and restored full credit for solar facilities whose construction began before January 1, 2025. These changes affect the credit calculation for both pre‑2022 and post‑2022 facilities across all renewable energy categories.

For 2026, the IRS specifies the credit rates that will apply to electricity sold from qualified facilities, distinguishing between those placed in service before and after January 1, 2022. The rates range from 3.1 ¢/kWh for older wind, closed‑loop biomass, and geothermal plants to 0.3 ¢/kWh for newer hydropower and marine projects. The notice also references related IRS guidance and regulations that detail eligibility, domestic‑content requirements, and the calculation methodology for the credit.

Key Elements

• Inflation Adjustment Factor (2026): 2.0570, applied to the base credit amounts.
  
• Wind Reference Price (2026): 3.17 ¢/kWh, below the 8 ¢ × inflation factor threshold, so wind credit phase‑out is avoided.
  
• Phase‑out Status: No phase‑out for wind or other renewable resources in 2026 under Section 45(b)(1).
  
• IRA‑Driven Credit Adjustments:
  
  • Bonus credits for small facilities (< 1 MW) and for meeting domestic‑content or energy‑community criteria.
    
  • Removal of the one‑half credit reduction for hydropower and marine/hydrokinetic facilities placed in service after 2022.
    
  • Restoration of full credit for solar facilities whose construction began before 2025.
    
• 2026 Credit Rates (by resource and service date):
  
  • Pre‑2022 facilities: 3.1 ¢/kWh (wind, closed‑loop biomass, geothermal) and 1.5 ¢/kWh (open‑loop biomass, landfill gas, trash, hydropower, marine).
    
  • Post‑2022 facilities: 0.6 ¢/kWh (wind, closed‑loop biomass, geothermal, solar) and 0.3 ¢/kWh (open‑loop biomass, landfill gas, trash).
    
  • Hydropower & marine (post‑2022): 0.6 ¢/kWh (no half‑reduction).
    
• Pending Reference Prices: For closed‑loop biomass, open‑loop biomass, geothermal, solar, municipal solid waste, qualified hydropower, and marine/hydrokinetic, the 2026 reference prices remain to be determined.
  
• Regulatory References: IRS Notices 2023‑38, 2024‑41, 2025‑08, and related Treasury regulations (1.45‑6, 1.45‑7, 1.45‑8, 1.45‑12) provide detailed eligibility and calculation guidance.

Louisiana’s 3‑Acre LNG Hub: BLM’s Direct Sale of Former Lighthouse Land

Overview

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has announced a non‑competitive direct sale of 2.97 acres of federal land in Cameron Parish, Louisiana. The parcel, formerly part of a lighthouse beacon site, will be transferred to Cameron Land Ventures LLC, an affiliate of Venture Global LNG, Inc. The sale is intended to support the development of a liquefied natural gas (LNG) hub that has already been evaluated in a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) environmental impact statement.

The transaction is governed by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) and BLM land‑sale regulations. A fair‑market‑value appraisal will precede the sale, and all minerals on the land will remain reserved for the United States. The BLM is conducting a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Environmental Assessment (EA) to determine whether the sale will have significant environmental impacts; a Finding of No Significant Impact would allow the sale to proceed, while significant impacts would trigger a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).

Stakeholders have 45 days (until July 16, 2026) to submit written comments. The BLM will also publish the notice in the local Cameron Parish Pilot newspaper and make all related documents, including the EA and appraisal report, available online. The sale reflects a broader trend of repurposing former federal infrastructure sites for energy development while ensuring compliance with environmental, historic, and tribal consultation requirements.

Key Elements

• Parcel Details: 2.97 acres in Cameron Parish, Louisiana; formerly part of a lighthouse beacon site; located in Section 32, Township 15 S, Range 10 W.
• Buyer: Cameron Land Ventures LLC (affiliate of Venture Global LNG, Inc.).
• Purpose: Support construction of an LNG hub already evaluated in a FERC Environmental Impact Statement.
• Sale Mechanism: Non‑competitive direct sale under FLPMA; no competitive bidding required.
• Price: Minimum fair‑market‑value appraisal to be completed before sale.
• Mineral Reservation: All minerals remain reserved for the United States; rights to prospect, mine, and remove deposits retained.
• Environmental Review: NEPA Environmental Assessment underway; potential for Finding of No Significant Impact or a full EIS.
• Public Comment Period: 45 days, ending July 16, 2026; comments accepted via mail, email, or online.
• Regulatory Compliance: Adherence to Endangered Species Act, National Historic Preservation Act, and Indian Tribes consultation under Executive Order 13175.
• Publication: Notice appears in the Federal Register and the Cameron Parish Pilot newspaper for three consecutive weeks.

Arizona’s 1‑GW Pumped‑Storage Plan Sparks Public Review

Overview
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has accepted a preliminary permit application from Nature and People First Arizona PHS, LLC to study the feasibility of a 1‑gigawatt pumped‑storage hydroelectric facility near Kayenta, Arizona. The project would use federal land managed by the Navajo Nation, creating two 10,000‑acre‑foot reservoirs and a large underground powerhouse to store and generate electricity. The preliminary permit only grants the applicant priority to file a full license; it does not authorize any construction or land‑disturbing activities until a final license is issued.

The notice invites public comments, motions to intervene, and competing applications until July 27, 2026. It outlines the technical scope of the proposed plant, including reservoir elevations, conduit lengths, turbine and generator capacities, and four potential transmission line alternatives. The project’s estimated annual generation of over 3 million megawatt‑hours could play a significant role in balancing Arizona’s electric grid and supporting renewable energy integration.

Key Elements
- Project size and capacity: 1 GW pumped‑storage plant with 10,000‑acre‑foot upper and lower reservoirs.
- Location: Approximately 12 mi southwest of Kayenta, on federal land within Navajo County, managed by the Navajo Nation.
- Infrastructure:
- 300‑acre upper reservoir at 7,590 ft MSL.
- 300‑acre lower reservoir at 6,100 ft MSL.
- 12,000‑ft concrete‑lined power conduit; 30‑ft diameter.
- Underground powerhouse (130 ft wide, 290 ft long, 200 ft high) housing four 335,000 hp pump/turbines and four 250 kW generators.
- Four draft‑tube tunnels (16‑ft diameter, 500 ft long) discharging into the lower reservoir.
- Transmission options: Four alternatives ranging from 16.7 mi to 108 mi, with voltage levels between 220 kV and 500 kV.
- Energy output: Estimated 3,120,750 MWh per year, supporting grid stability and renewable integration.
- Regulatory scope: Preliminary permit grants filing priority only; no construction or land disturbance permitted until a final license is issued.
- Public participation: Comments, motions to intervene, and competing applications due by July 27, 2026; electronic filing encouraged.
- Stakeholder engagement: Navajo Nation land use, potential environmental impacts, and regional energy planning considerations.

U.S. Congress Designates May 2025 as Wildfire Preparedness Week to Boost Public Safety and Resilience

Overview

The House of Representatives has passed a resolution recognizing May 4–10, 2025, as Wildfire Preparedness Week. The measure aims to raise public awareness of wildfire risks, promote lifesaving tactics, and support community‑level preparedness initiatives across the country.

Wildfire activity has surged in recent years, with 64,897 fires in 2024 consuming nearly 9 million acres, and California alone reporting 8,024 fires that year. Human activity accounts for roughly 85 % of all wildland fires, underscoring the importance of prevention and education. The resolution highlights the health toll of wildfire smoke—triggering asthma, heart attacks, and strokes—and the occupational hazards faced by firefighters, who are exposed to smoke and toxic chemicals.

The resolution calls for coordinated efforts to provide resources, early warning systems, and evacuation plans, while encouraging vegetation and forest management practices. It also commits to financial support for communities directly affected by catastrophic firestorms, reinforcing the national commitment to wildfire resilience.

Key Elements

• Official Recognition: May 4–10, 2025, designated as Wildfire Preparedness Week nationwide.
  
• Education & Awareness: Support for programs that teach fire safety, evacuation procedures, and the science of fire behavior.
  
• Prevention Measures: Promotion of evacuation planning, vegetation and forest management, and restrictions on combustibles during high‑risk periods.
  
• Health & Safety: Acknowledgment of long‑term smoke exposure risks to the public and firefighters, including respiratory and cardiovascular effects.
  
• Statistical Context: Reference to 2024 and early‑2025 wildfire data (over 64,000 fires, 9 million acres burned, 8,024 California fires).
  
• Human‑Caused Fires: Emphasis that nearly 85 % of wildland fires are human‑initiated, highlighting the role of human behavior in prevention.
  
• Community Support: Commitment to financial assistance for communities during and after major fire events.
  
• Geoscience Integration: Encouragement of early warning systems and forest management practices that align with ecological and geological understanding of fire regimes.

Montana Tightens Mining Rules to Protect Water and Land

Overview

The U.S. Interior Department’s Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) has approved a comprehensive amendment to Montana’s state mining program under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). The change, driven by Montana House Bill 587, introduces a new, more precise definition of “material damage” that focuses on hydrologic balance, alluvial valley floors, and subsidence. It also gives mining operators the option to submit their own hydrologic data when federal or state sources are unavailable, streamlining the permitting process while maintaining rigorous environmental safeguards.

The amendment reflects Montana’s effort to align its state regulations with federal standards while tailoring them to local hydrologic and land‑use conditions. It clarifies how water quality and quantity impacts are measured, requiring that any adverse effect be quantifiable and measurable to a significant degree of confidence. The changes also incorporate Montana’s existing water‑quality classifications, ensuring that beneficial uses such as agriculture, livestock, and recreation are protected.

While the rule is largely welcomed by regulators and many stakeholders, it has sparked debate over its retroactive application to pending permits and the potential for increased regulatory burden on operators and local communities. OSM’s approval, effective June 29 2026, signals federal confidence that the amendments meet SMCRA’s requirements and provide a balanced approach to mining, water protection, and land stewardship.

Key Elements

• New Definition of Material Damage

  • Covers hydrologic balance outside the permit area, alluvial valley floors, and subsidence.
    
  • Requires a quantifiable adverse impact that precludes existing or reasonably foreseeable water uses.
    
  • Aligns with federal definitions used in cumulative hydrologic impact assessments.

• Self‑Collected Hydrologic Information Option

  • Permit applicants may provide their own data for probable hydrologic consequences if federal or state data are unavailable.
    
  • Mirrors federal regulations (30 CFR 780.21©(2)) and maintains regulatory oversight.

• Contingency Provisions from HB 587

  • Severability clause: invalid parts can be severed without affecting the rest of the amendment.
    
  • Contingent voidness: any provision disapproved by the Secretary of the Interior becomes void.
    
  • Effective date: the amendment takes effect on June 29 2026, the date of OSM approval.
    
  • Retroactive applicability: attempts to apply changes to pending actions are rejected; the amendment applies only to new permits and actions after the effective date.

• Regulatory Consistency

  • The amendment is consistent with SMCRA and federal implementing regulations.
    
  • OSM’s approval confirms that Montana’s program meets federal standards for surface mining regulation and reclamation.

• Implications for Stakeholders

  • Mining operators must demonstrate that their activities will not cause material damage to water resources or land integrity.
    
  • Water users, including farmers, ranchers, and tribal communities, gain clearer protection of beneficial uses.
    
  • The rule streamlines permitting while preserving rigorous environmental safeguards, balancing economic activity with natural resource stewardship.

Ski Resort Expansion Spurs 694‑Acre Forest Plan Shift in Wyoming

Overview
The U.S. Forest Service is amending the 1997 Targhee National Forest Land Management Plan to accommodate the expansion of the Grand Targhee ski resort. The amendment will reclassify 694 acres in the Teton Basin Ranger District from “Visual Quality Maintenance” and “Aquatic Influence Zone” to “Special Use Permit Recreation Sites,” allowing the resort’s Special Use Permit boundary to extend into these lands. This change is part of a broader Master Development Plan that has already undergone a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and Record of Decision (ROD).

The amendment reflects a shift from conservation‑focused land prescriptions toward recreational use, potentially altering visual, ecological, and hydrological conditions in the area. While the Forest Service has determined that the change is consistent with federal law and policy, it has opened a 60‑day public objection period to ensure that stakeholders can raise concerns before the amendment is finalized.

Key Elements

• Land reclassification: 694 acres moved from Management Prescription Areas 2.1.2 (Visual Quality Maintenance) and 2.8.3 (Aquatic Influence Zone) to Area 4.2 (Special Use Permit Recreation Sites).
  
• Purpose: Accommodate the Grand Targhee Resort’s expansion under its Master Development Plan.
  
• Environmental review: FEIS and ROD already issued; amendment is programmatic, not project‑specific.
  
• Public participation: 60‑day objection window (per 36 CFR 219.53) for individuals or entities with substantive prior comments.
  
• Submission methods: Written objections via mail, private carrier, hand delivery, fax, or email to the Forest Service’s Objection Reviewing Officer in Ogden, UT.
  
• Responsible officials: Forest Supervisor Kim Pierson (approval authority) and Deputy Regional Forester Brant Peterson (reviewing officer).
  
• Implications for geoscience and natural resources: Potential impacts on visual quality, aquatic ecosystems, and land‑use planning; highlights the balance between recreation development and environmental stewardship in national forest lands.

EIA Seeks Public Input on 3‑Year Extension of Coal Data Collection

Overview
The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) has issued a notice inviting public comment on a proposed three‑year extension of its Coal Markets Reporting System (CMRS). The extension, which includes a few changes to the existing surveys, is required under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The CMRS gathers detailed information on U.S. coal production, quality, consumption, stocks, and prices through five key surveys (EIA‑3, EIA‑7A, EIA‑8A, EIA‑6, and EIA‑20).

The data collected by these surveys feed into national energy forecasts, policy analysis, and market studies. They help assess the adequacy of coal supplies, evaluate the impact of regulations, and support research on coal technology and environmental effects. The proposed extension also adds up to 100 pre‑testing interviews each year to refine survey questions and reduce respondent burden.

Comments on the proposed collection—its necessity, burden estimates, and potential improvements—must be submitted by June 29, 2026. Stakeholders can send written feedback to the EIA Clearance Officer or use the online portal to view the forms and instructions.

Key Elements

• Extension Scope: Three‑year renewal of CMRS with minor changes to Forms EIA‑3, EIA‑6, EIA‑7A, EIA‑8A, and EIA‑20.
  
• Survey Coverage:
  
  • EIA‑3: Quarterly coal use at manufacturing, processing, and institutional sites.
    
  • EIA‑7A: Annual production, reserves, and sales data from mines and preparation plants.
    
  • EIA‑8A: State‑level coal stocks, exports, and export revenue.
    
  • EIA‑6 & EIA‑20: Standby surveys activated during supply or transportation disruptions.
    
• Pre‑testing: Up to 100 interviews per year to test terminology, clarity, and potential new questions.
  
• Burden & Cost: Estimated 3,249 respondent hours, equating to $308,622.51 in burden costs; no additional direct costs to respondents.
  
• Data Uses: Supports EIA’s Short‑Term Integrated Forecasting System (STIFS) and National Energy Modeling System (NEMS) coal market module, informing policy, forecasting, and market analysis.
  
• Comment Period: Feedback due by June 29, 2026; submissions via EIA website or email to Debra Coaxum, Clearance Officer.

FERC Opens Public Scoping on Northern Natural Gas’s Central Mainline Expansion

Overview

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has announced the start of a scoping period for the Central Mainline Corridor Expansion Project proposed by Northern Natural Gas Company. The project will add and upgrade pipelines and compressor stations across Iowa and Nebraska, aiming to increase natural‑gas delivery capacity to roughly 535,000 dekatherms per day in winter and 525,000 dekatherms per day in summer. FERC will use the scoping process to identify the environmental issues that must be addressed in a forthcoming environmental document, which will guide its decision on whether to issue a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity.

The scoping period invites written comments from the public, landowners, and agencies by June 22, 2026. Comments should focus on potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and mitigation measures. The project will disturb about 530 acres of land during construction, with 161 acres retained for permanent operation and the remainder slated for restoration. Northern has also prepared a fact sheet for landowners explaining eminent domain rights and the possibility of easement negotiations.

FERC’s environmental review will cover a broad range of resource areas—geology, soils, water, wetlands, wildlife, endangered species, cultural resources, land use, air quality, noise, and safety. Depending on the findings, FERC will prepare either an Environmental Assessment (EA) or a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), each followed by public comment periods. The agency is also initiating Section 106 consultations with historic preservation offices to assess impacts on historic properties.

Key Elements

• Project Scope:

  • 9 mi of 20‑inch Omaha 3rd branch pipeline loop
    
  • 14.6 mi of 30‑inch Nebraska Public Power District Princeton Road branch
    
  • 2.5 mi extension of 20‑inch Des Moines C‑line pipeline
    
  • 9.83 mi uprated 20‑inch Des Moines C‑line south loop
    
  • New 20,500‑hp gas‑driven compressor station near Clarion, IA
    
  • New meter station and above‑ground facilities (launcher, receiver, tie‑in valves, etc.)
    
  • Modification of five existing compressor stations for bidirectional flow
    

• Environmental Impact Areas: geology, soils, water resources, wetlands, vegetation, wildlife, endangered species, cultural resources, land use, air quality, noise, reliability, and safety.

• Land Use & Eminent Domain:

  • ~530 acres disturbed during construction; ~161 acres retained for operation; remainder restored.
    
  • 32 % of pipeline routes parallel existing rights‑of‑way.
    
  • Landowners may negotiate easements; if not, eminent domain may be invoked under the Natural Gas Act.
    

• Public Participation:

  • Scoping deadline: June 22, 2026.
    
  • Submission methods: eComment, eFiling, or paper mail.
    
  • Comments must address environmental effects, alternatives, and mitigation.
    

• NEPA Process:

  • FERC will prepare an Environmental Document (EA or EIS).
    
  • EA or EIS will be published in eLibrary; public comment periods will follow.
    

• Section 106 Consultation:

  • FERC is engaging state historic preservation offices and other stakeholders to assess impacts on historic properties.
    

• Cooperating Agencies:

  • Agencies with jurisdiction or expertise may request cooperating agency status to assist in the environmental review.

FERC Opens Public Scoping on Decommissioning of California’s Potter Valley Hydroelectric Project

Overview

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) has filed a request with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to surrender and decommission the Potter Valley Hydroelectric Project, a complex of dams and diversion structures on the Eel and Russian Rivers in California. The project sits on federal lands managed by the U.S. Forest Service, and its removal would restore large stretches of riverine and upland habitat, including the remnant inundation zone of Lake Pillsbury and Van Arsdale Reservoir.

FERC is initiating a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) scoping process to identify the environmental issues that should be examined in a forthcoming environmental impact statement. The agency is soliciting written and oral comments from the public, resource agencies, Native American tribes, and NGOs by July 24, 2026, and will hold two scoping meetings in Ukiah, California, on June 23–24, 2026. Comments will shape the scope of the NEPA analysis and help focus the study on the most significant impacts.

The proposed surrender includes removal of Scott Dam and Cape Horn Dam, decommissioning of associated facilities, and restoration of recreational and natural resources. PG&E also plans to construct a New Eel‑Russian Facility (NERF) operated by the Eel‑Russian Project Authority, which would divert water from the Eel River to the Russian River watershed. Once NERF is built, its facilities would be removed from the project’s federal license, and the land would be returned to its pre‑project condition.

Key Elements

• Project Scope

  • Decommissioning of Scott Dam, Cape Horn Dam, and related infrastructure.
    
  • Removal of recreational facilities and restoration of surrounding lands.
    
  • Construction of the New Eel‑Russian Facility (NERF) for water diversion, followed by its removal from the federal license.
    
  • Restoration of Lake Pillsbury and Van Arsdale Reservoir inundation zones, riparian, wetlands, and upland habitats.

• NEPA Focus Areas

  • Geology and soils, hydrology, water quality, and aquatic resources.
    
  • Marine, botanical, wildlife, and threatened/endangered species impacts.
    
  • Recreation, land use, aesthetic, socio‑economic, cultural, historic, and tribal resources.
    
  • Air quality, noise, and traffic considerations.

• Public Participation

  • Written and oral comments due by July 24, 2026.
    
  • Two scoping meetings: June 23 (evening) and June 24 (daytime) in Ukiah, CA.
    
  • Multiple electronic filing options (eComment, eFiling) and paper submissions.
    
  • Docket number: P‑77‑332.

• Administrative Details

  • FERC will issue a draft NEPA document for public comment, followed by a final version.
    
  • Comments will be recorded by stenography and entered into the formal record.
    
  • Stakeholders can subscribe to eSubscription for real‑time updates.

FERC Opens the Floodgate: New Mississippi River Hydroelectric Project Seeks Public Input

Overview
The U.S. Department of Energy and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) have announced that Lock+ Hydro Friends Fund X, LLC intends to file a license application for a new hydroelectric facility at the existing Melvin Price Locks and Dam on the Mississippi River, spanning Madison County, Illinois, and St. Charles County, Missouri. The proposed project will harness river flow to generate renewable electricity, potentially adding capacity to the regional grid while preserving the operational integrity of the locks and dam.

FERC’s notice outlines the pre‑filing steps: a Pre‑Application Document (PAD) has been submitted, detailing the project’s design, schedule, and environmental considerations. The agency is now soliciting comments on the PAD and an initial Scoping Document (SD1), inviting stakeholders—including federal, state, local, tribal, and environmental agencies—to participate in shaping the forthcoming environmental assessment or impact statement under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

The process includes two scoping meetings (daytime and evening) on June 23, 2026, and an environmental site review the same day. Comments must be filed by July 27, 2026. The project’s environmental review will address site‑specific and cumulative impacts, alternative energy options, and compliance with the Endangered Species Act and the National Historic Preservation Act.

Key Elements

• Project Site: Melvin Price Locks and Dam, Mississippi River, Illinois/Missouri border.
  
• Purpose: Generate renewable hydroelectric power while maintaining lock and dam operations.
  
• Licensing Stage: Notice of intent to file an original license; pre‑filing PAD already submitted.
  
• Environmental Review: NEPA‑mandated EA or EIS to evaluate site‑specific and cumulative effects, including water quality, fish and wildlife, and cultural resources.
  
• Scoping Process: Two public meetings (daytime and evening) on June 23, 2026, to define the scope of the NEPA document.
  
• Comment Period: Written and oral comments accepted until July 27, 2026; submissions via FERC eFiling or mail.
  
• Cooperating Agencies: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, NOAA Fisheries, State Historic Preservation Officers, and other relevant agencies may assist in preparing the environmental document but cannot intervene.
  
• Public Participation: Open to individuals, NGOs, tribes, and agencies; site visit scheduled for June 23, 2026, at the river shoreline.
  
• Regulatory Framework: Governed by 18 CFR Part 5 (FERC licensing) and NEPA, with additional compliance under the Endangered Species Act and the National Historic Preservation Act.

EPA Releases Public Comments on Multiple Environmental Impact Statements

Overview

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has published a notice of availability for its comment letters on several federal Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) issued in May 2026. In compliance with the Clean Air Act and the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) guidance, the agency is making these comments publicly accessible to inform stakeholders and the broader community about its assessments of proposed projects.

The notice lists six distinct projects, ranging from a resort expansion in New Hampshire to the continued operation of Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico. Each comment includes a brief summary of EPA’s concerns, recommendations, and regulatory considerations, and provides contact information for further inquiries. The comments are intended to influence decision‑makers, help refine project designs, and ensure that environmental, health, and safety standards are upheld.

For geoscientists, energy and mineral resource professionals, and natural resource managers, the EPA’s feedback offers insight into how federal agencies evaluate land use, resource extraction, and infrastructure projects. It also highlights the agency’s role in balancing development with environmental protection across diverse ecosystems and industrial settings.

Key Elements

• Public Availability: EPA comment letters are posted online and can be accessed through the EPA’s Federal Activities Office.
  
• Projects Covered
  
  • Waterville Valley Resort Proposed Expansion (NH) – comment period ends 08/27/2026.
    
  • Lincoln National Forest Integrated Non‑Native Invasive Plant Management Project – contact Tanner Nygren.
    
  • Grand Targhee Master Development Plan Projects – review period ends 06/29/2026.
    
  • Johnsonville Fossil Plant Ash Impoundment Closure – comment period ends 07/13/2026.
    
  • Site‑Wide Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Operation of Sandia National Laboratories/New Mexico – contact Adria Bodour.
    
• Regulatory Context: Comments are prepared under 42 U.S.C. 4332 and CEQ guidance, ensuring alignment with federal environmental review standards.
  
• Stakeholder Engagement: Each letter includes contact details for EPA staff to facilitate dialogue with project proponents, local communities, and other interested parties.
  
• Implications for Natural Resources: The EPA’s assessments touch on land use change, invasive species management, fossil fuel infrastructure, and laboratory operations—key areas for geoscience and resource management professionals.
  
• Timeline: The notice covers EISs filed on May 18, 2026, with comment periods extending through late July 2026, providing a window for public input and potential project adjustments.

Reclamation Streamlines Hydropower Projects Under NEPA with New Categorical Exclusions

Overview
The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has updated its National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) procedures to add two new categorical exclusions (CEs) for hydropower‑related activities. These exclusions, incorporated into the Department of the Interior’s Handbook of NEPA Implementing Procedures, allow the Bureau to bypass the usual environmental assessment (EA) or environmental impact statement (EIS) for a defined set of routine hydropower actions that historically have shown no significant environmental impact. The change is effective immediately upon publication, enabling Reclamation to accelerate project approvals while maintaining environmental safeguards.

Reclamation, the nation’s second‑largest hydropower producer, operates 77 facilities that generate roughly 14,750 MW of capacity and supply energy to over 3.5 million U.S. homes. The new CEs align with the agency’s Hydropower Action Plan and broader executive orders aimed at unleashing American energy. By formally recognizing that certain lease issuances, non‑federal development approvals, and routine maintenance or replacement activities do not typically alter the human environment, Reclamation can focus its NEPA resources on projects with greater environmental uncertainty.

The policy also preserves rigorous oversight. Before applying a CE, Reclamation must evaluate each action for “extraordinary circumstances” that could elevate its environmental significance. If such circumstances exist, the agency will conduct a full EA or EIS. All CE applications are documented with a checklist to demonstrate compliance, ensuring transparency and accountability.

Key Elements

• New Categorical Exclusions Added

  • Lease issuance or alternative authorization for non‑federal hydropower development that supplements existing Reclamation facilities.
    
  • Maintenance, rehabilitation, and replacement of existing hydropower equipment (turbines, generators, transformers, etc.) with minor changes in size, location, or operation.

• Immediate Effect

  • Exclusions become operative upon publication, allowing Reclamation to apply them to future projects without delay.

• Extraordinary Circumstances Review

  • Each proposed action is screened for factors that might make it environmentally significant; if present, a full EA or EIS is required.

• Documentation and Transparency

  • Reclamation uses a checklist to record CE applicability and the absence of extraordinary circumstances, and all substantiation reports are publicly available.

• Alignment with Energy Policy

  • Supports the Hydropower Action Plan and executive orders focused on expanding domestic energy production and improving operational efficiency.

• Scope of Covered Facilities

  • Includes turbines, generators, transformers, pumps, gates, control systems, and new instrumentation across Reclamation’s 77 hydropower sites.

OSHA Grants Temporary Permission for Advanced Tunnel‑Boring Work in New Hampshire, Invites Public Input

Overview

The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has issued a notice granting the Obayashi‑Jay Dee Joint Venture (OJD) a temporary interim order that allows the company to conduct compressed‑air work during the construction of the Cemetery Brook Drain Tunnel in Manchester, New Hampshire. The order is a precursor to a permanent variance that would permanently modify OSHA’s compressed‑air standards for this specific project.

OSHA’s preliminary findings conclude that OJD’s proposed alternative procedures—using a tunnel‑boring machine (TBM) with a pressurized working chamber, staged decompression based on the 1992 French Decompression Tables, and a single airlock instead of a separate decompression chamber—would provide a workplace that is at least as safe and healthful as the current federal standard. The agency is inviting the public to submit comments on the variance application by June 29, 2026.

For professionals in geoscience, engineering, and natural resource fields, the notice highlights how advanced tunneling technology can reduce worker exposure to compressed‑air hazards while still meeting rigorous safety requirements. It also underscores OSHA’s willingness to adapt regulations to innovative construction methods, provided that detailed safety plans, training, inspections, and reporting protocols are in place.

Key Elements

• Scope of the Project

  • Construction of the Cemetery Brook Drain Tunnel using an earth‑pressure‑balanced TBM.
    
  • Work occurs below the water table in soft soils (clay, silt, sand).
    
  • Hyperbaric interventions limited to a maximum of 37 psi gauge.

• Alternative Decompression Approach

  • Replacement of OSHA’s decompression tables with the 1992 French Decompression Tables (staged decompression, optional oxygen).
    
  • Staged decompression is expected to lower the incidence of decompression sickness compared to continuous decompression.

• Equipment and Facility Modifications

  • Use of the TBM’s main chamber (inner and outer locks) as the sole decompression space; no separate special decompression chamber required.
    
  • TBM’s hyperbaric chambers must be designed, fabricated, inspected, and tested per ASME PVHO‑1 standards.

• Safety and Health Requirements

  • Submission of a Hyperbaric Operations Manual (HOM) detailing procedures, training, and medical oversight.
    
  • Mandatory presence of a hyperbaric supervisor and a certified hyperbaric physician during all interventions.
    
  • Comprehensive job hazard analysis (JHA), checklists, and incident investigation protocols.

• Training and Communication

  • Workers must receive training on hyperbaric entry, work, exit, emergency procedures, and recognition of decompression illness.
    
  • Reliable, power‑assisted communication systems must be available in the hyperbaric work area.

• Inspections, Tests, and Recordkeeping

  • Regular inspections of TBM equipment, temperature control, ventilation, and fire‑suppression systems.
    
  • Detailed logs of each hyperbaric intervention (time, pressure, personnel, outcomes).
    
  • OSHA Form 301 and Form 300 reporting for any recordable injury or illness, with rapid notification requirements.

• Public Comment Period

  • Comments, documents, or hearing requests must be submitted by June 29, 2026 through the Federal eRulemaking Portal.
    
  • OSHA will consider public input before deciding on a permanent variance.

• Historical Context

  • OSHA has previously granted similar variances for other subaqueous tunnel projects (e.g., Anacostia River Tunnel, Blue Plains Tunnel).
    
  • No safety incidents have been reported under those prior variances.

This notice illustrates how regulatory flexibility can accommodate cutting‑edge tunneling technology while maintaining high safety standards for workers exposed to compressed‑air environments.

NSF Extends Polar Science Review Panel for Two More Years

Overview

The National Science Foundation (NSF) has officially renewed the Proposal Review Panel for Polar Programs for an additional two‑year term, effective June 26, 2026. The renewal follows a formal consultation with the General Services Administration and a public‑interest determination that the panel’s continued operation is essential for NSF’s mission.

This panel is the sole mechanism by which NSF evaluates proposals for research in the Arctic and Antarctic. Its members—scientists, engineers, artists, and educators with deep expertise in polar disciplines—provide independent, peer‑reviewed assessments that guide funding decisions across atmospheric, oceanic, glaciological, and ecological studies. The panel’s interdisciplinary composition ensures that complex, high‑cost field campaigns receive rigorous scrutiny and that emerging data‑intensive research areas are appropriately prioritized.

By renewing the panel, NSF guarantees continuity in the quality and consistency of its polar science funding. The decision supports U.S. leadership in understanding climate change, sea‑level rise, and global Earth‑system dynamics, while also fostering workforce development and international collaboration in these strategically critical regions.

Key Elements

• Renewal Term: Two years, from June 26, 2026 to June 25, 2028.
  
• Effective Date: June 26, 2026, following NSF approval on April 20, 2026.
  
• Committee Composition:
  
  • Scientists from all polar disciplines (atmosphere, ocean, ice, ecosystems).
    
  • Artists, writers, and educators with firsthand polar experience.
    
  • Broad geographic and institutional representation.
    
• Funding & Resources:
  
  • Annual budget of approximately $25 million.
    
  • 0.66 full‑time equivalent (FTE) staff support.
    
• Justification for Renewal:
  
  • Unique expertise not available in other federal advisory bodies.
    
  • Small, interconnected research community with high conflict‑of‑interest risk.
    
  • Critical for independent merit review of logistically complex, high‑cost field campaigns.
    
• Role in NSF Operations:
  
  • Provides gold‑standard peer review that informs funding recommendations.
    
  • Ensures alignment with national priorities and administration goals.
    
• Contact: Crystal Robinson, Committee Management Officer, NSF (703‑292‑8687).

NSF Keeps Its Astronomical Review Panel Going Strong

Overview

The National Science Foundation (NSF) has officially renewed the Proposal Review Panel for Astronomical Sciences for an additional two‑year term, effective June 26, 2026. The decision follows a formal consultation with the General Services Administration and a public‑interest determination that the panel’s continued operation is essential to NSF’s mission.

The panel’s mandate is to evaluate and rank research proposals in astronomy and astrophysics, ensuring that funding decisions reflect the highest scientific standards and national priorities. Its members bring deep expertise in astrophysics, instrumentation, and project management, and they are selected to represent a broad spectrum of institutions, career stages, and geographic regions.

By maintaining this specialized review body, NSF preserves a critical mechanism for identifying cutting‑edge projects—such as the recently funded AI Institutes that merge astronomy with artificial intelligence—and for sustaining U.S. leadership in fundamental and applied space science. The panel’s work directly supports the development of new technologies, workforce training, and interdisciplinary collaborations that benefit related fields like geosciences, atmospheric science, and energy research.

Key Elements

• Renewal Term: Two years, effective June 26, 2026, following approval on April 20, 2026.
  
• Funding & Resources: $352,000 budget, 6.6 full‑time equivalents, and a $2,000 administrative support allocation.
  
• Membership Criteria: Scientists with expertise in astrophysics, training of young researchers, and technical fields such as construction, environmental impact, safety, and project management.
  
• Diversity of Experience: Mix of junior and senior scientists, large and small institutions, and nationwide geographic representation.
  
• Role in NSF Operations: Provides independent, peer‑reviewed recommendations that shape NSF’s funding portfolio and strategic priorities.
  
• Strategic Impact: Identified and supported high‑impact initiatives, including two AI Institutes launched in 2024 that integrate astronomy with artificial intelligence to advance both fields.
  
• Public‑Interest Determination: Demonstrated that the panel’s expertise is unique and not duplicable by other federal advisory bodies, ensuring efficient use of taxpayer resources.
  
• Contact Information: Crystal Robinson, Committee Management Officer, NSF (703‑292‑8687).

New Hampshire Hydro Project Gets 12‑Month Window to Secure Water‑Quality Certification

Overview

On March 18 2026, Ashuelot River Hydro, Inc. submitted a Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 401(a)(1) water‑quality certification request to the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (DES) for its proposed hydroelectric project. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has issued a notice confirming that DES has a reasonable period of one year—until March 18 2027—to review and act on the application.

If DES fails to act or refuses to certify the project by that deadline, the CWA’s certification requirement is deemed waived, allowing the project to proceed without a formal water‑quality certification. This mechanism is intended to balance timely project development with environmental oversight.

The notice underscores the coordination between state environmental authorities and federal energy regulators, and it highlights the procedural safeguards that protect both the project’s economic viability and the integrity of New Hampshire’s aquatic ecosystems.

Key Elements

• Project and Agency: Ashuelot River Hydro, Inc.; New Hampshire DES; FERC (Project No. 7887‑019).
  
• Certification Request Date: March 18 2026.
  
• Reasonable Period: One year, ending March 18 2027.
  
• Waiver Provision: If DES does not act by the deadline, the CWA certification is waived under 33 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1).
  
• Regulatory Basis: 18 CFR 2.1 (FERC authority) and 40 CFR 121.5 (CWA certification definition).
  
• Implications for Geoscience and Natural Resources: The notice clarifies the timeline for assessing potential impacts on water quality, stream ecology, and sediment transport, ensuring that hydroelectric development proceeds with an understanding of environmental compliance requirements.

Michigan’s One‑Year Deadline to Approve Power Plant Water‑Quality Certification

Overview

On May 21 2026 the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (Michigan EGLE) notified the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) that Northern States Power Company (NSPC) had submitted a Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 401(a)(1) water‑quality certification request for a new project. The request, filed on May 19 2026, requires Michigan EGLE to review and either approve or deny the certification within one year.

If Michigan EGLE fails to act by May 19 2027, the certification is deemed waived under CWA §401(a)(1), allowing the project to proceed without the environmental review that normally accompanies a water‑quality certification. This notice formalizes the deadline and clarifies the legal consequences of inaction.

The decision will affect water quality protections in the project’s watershed, potentially altering the environmental safeguards that would otherwise be imposed. It also illustrates the interplay between state environmental agencies and federal energy regulators in balancing infrastructure development with ecological stewardship.

Key Elements

• Request Received: Michigan EGLE received NSPC’s water‑quality certification request on May 19 2026.
  
• Deadline: The agency must act by May 19 2027 (one year).
  
• Waiver Provision: Failure to act by the deadline results in a waiver of the certification under CWA §401(a)(1).
  
• Regulatory Framework: The notice cites 18 CFR 4.34(b)(5) and 33 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1) governing the process.
  
• Implications for the Project: A waiver allows the power plant project to proceed without the environmental safeguards normally required for water‑quality certification.
  
• FERC’s Role: FERC oversees the certification process and ensures compliance with federal regulations.
  
• Stakeholder Impact: The outcome will influence local water quality, ecosystem health, and community interests in the affected region.

Egan Cavern Expansion: New Salt Dome Storage to Boost Natural Gas Supply

Overview
The U.S. Department of Energy and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) have released an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the proposed expansion of the Egan Hub Storage facility in Wyoming. The project would add two new salt‑dome storage caverns (Cavern 6 and 7), a leaching and dewatering system, new pipelines, compressor and dehydration facilities, and additional freshwater and brine infrastructure. The goal is to increase the capacity of the Egan Hub to store and transport natural gas across the interstate system, supporting regional energy security and market liquidity.

The EA, prepared under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), concludes that approving the expansion would not constitute a major federal action that significantly affects the quality of the human environment. It identifies potential impacts on groundwater, surface water, air quality, and local ecosystems, and proposes mitigation measures such as careful site selection, monitoring, and restoration plans. Alternatives—including no‑action and smaller‑scale expansions—were evaluated, with the preferred option balancing economic benefits against environmental safeguards.

Public participation is a key component of the review. Comments on the EA are due by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on June 22, 2026. FERC encourages electronic submissions through its eComment or eFiling platforms, but paper comments may also be mailed. The notice invites stakeholders—including landowners, local governments, Native American tribes, and the general public—to weigh in on the project’s environmental implications before the Commission makes a decision on the Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity.

Key Elements

• Project Scope

  • Construction of Cavern 6 and 7 in existing salt dome formations.
    
  • New leaching and dewatering facility, freshwater and brine pipelines (0.25 mi each).
    
  • Two 0.25 mi natural gas pipelines to connect new caverns to the existing hub.
    
  • New compressor building (three 5,500 hp units) and dehydration facility.
    
  • Freshwater supply well and 0.75 mi freshwater pipeline.
    
  • Saltwater disposal well (SWD 7) and connection to existing disposal system.

• Environmental Assessment Findings

  • Project deemed not a major federal action under NEPA.
    
  • Identified potential impacts on groundwater, surface water, air quality, and local habitats.
    
  • Mitigation measures include site selection, monitoring, restoration, and operational safeguards.

• Public Comment Process

  • Deadline: June 22, 2026, 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time.
    
  • Three filing methods: eComment, eFiling, or paper mail.
    
  • Comments should focus on environmental effects, alternatives, and mitigation.

• Regulatory Context

  • FERC is the lead federal agency under the Natural Gas Act of 1938.
    
  • Decision will be based on economic need and environmental considerations.
    
  • Intervenor status not required for comment; only for seeking rehearing or judicial review.

• Stakeholder Engagement

  • Notice mailed to landowners, federal, state, local agencies, elected officials, Native American tribes, and local media.
    
  • EA available electronically via FERC’s website and eLibrary.
    

These elements outline the technical, environmental, and procedural aspects of the Egan Cavern Expansion Project, providing a clear framework for stakeholders to assess its implications.

Michigan Sets One‑Year Deadline for Power Plant Water‑Quality Approval

Overview

On May 21 2026, the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (Michigan EGLE) notified the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) that Northern States Power Company (NSP) had submitted a Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 401(a)(1) water‑quality certification request for a project under consideration. The notice, filed under FERC Project No. 2587‑066, establishes the key dates for the certification process and outlines the consequences if the state fails to act.

The document serves as a procedural reminder rather than a decision. It confirms that Michigan EGLE received the request on May 19 2026 and sets a one‑year deadline—May 19 2027—for the state to approve or deny the certification. If Michigan EGLE does not act by that date, the certification is deemed waived under CWA § 401(a)(1), allowing the project to proceed without the required water‑quality assessment.

For stakeholders in the energy, geoscience, and natural‑resource sectors, the notice underscores the importance of timely environmental review. It also highlights how regulatory timelines can directly influence project development, permitting, and compliance obligations.

Key Elements

• Request Source: Northern States Power Company (NSP) submitted a CWA Section 401(a)(1) water‑quality certification request on May 19 2026.
  
• Regulatory Framework: The notice references 18 CFR 4.34(b)(5) and 18 CFR 2.1, linking FERC’s procedural rules to the Clean Water Act.
  
• Deadline: Michigan EGLE must act by May 19 2027; this one‑year period is the statutory “reasonable period of time.”
  
• Waiver Provision: Failure to act by the deadline results in a waiver of the certification requirement, permitting the project to move forward without a formal water‑quality assessment.
  
• Parties Involved: Michigan EGLE (state certifying authority), FERC (federal regulator), and NSP (project proponent).
  
• Implications for Geoscience & Natural Resources: The notice illustrates how water‑quality certifications intersect with hydro‑environmental assessments, watershed management, and compliance with federal environmental statutes.
  
• Nature of Document: A procedural notice; no decision or approval is granted at this stage.

FERC Extends Data‑Gathering Rules on Geomagnetic Storms, Seeking Public Input

Overview

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has extended the approved information‑collection program FERC‑725N—the data set required for the Mandatory Reliability Standard TPL‑007‑4 that governs how the bulk electric system (BES) plans for geomagnetic disturbance events. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, FERC is inviting comments on whether the continued collection of this data is necessary, accurate, and efficient.

The standard requires transmission planners, planning coordinators, and other BES operators to conduct vulnerability assessments of geomagnetic storms, develop corrective action plans, and report their findings to the Electric Reliability Organization (ERO). The extended collection imposes an estimated 78,600 hours of annual effort and $4.99 million in costs across roughly 1,965 entities, including generators, transmission owners, and planners.

Comments are due by June 29, 2026. Stakeholders can submit written feedback via email, mail, or the Office of Management and Budget’s online portal, citing docket IC26‑19‑000 and FERC‑725N.

Key Elements

• Extension of the approved collection with no changes to the data requirements.
  
• Purpose: Support the reliability standard that ensures the BES can withstand geomagnetic disturbances.
  
• Burden estimates:
  
  • 78,600 total hours per year, translating to about $4.99 million in labor costs.
    
  • Breakdown by entity type (generators, planners, owners) and activity (annual review, record retention).
    
• Entities affected: Roughly 1,965 bulk‑power system participants, including planning coordinators, transmission planners, generators, and transmission owners.
  
• Public comment focus:
  
  1. Necessity and practical utility of the data collection.
     
  2. Accuracy of burden and cost estimates.
     
  3. Ways to improve data quality and clarity.
     
  4. Strategies to reduce respondent burden, such as automation or technology solutions.
     
• Submission channels: Email to FERC, USPS, or hand delivery to Washington, DC or Rockville, MD addresses; online portal via OMB.
  
• Regulatory context: The standard is part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 framework, certified by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) and overseen by FERC.

Southern Star Pipeline Plans 2‑Mile Relocation to Support Kansas Trafficway Upgrade – Public Comment Deadline July 27

Overview

Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc. has filed a request with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to relocate approximately two miles of its 16‑inch‑diameter pipeline and upgrade the Clinton Town Border meter setting in Douglas County, Kansas. The move is intended to clear space for the Kansas Department of Transportation’s South Lawrence Trafficway improvements, ensuring that the pipeline does not interfere with the new roadway alignment.

The project is estimated to cost about $19 million and is covered under Southern Star’s blanket authorization (Docket CP82‑479‑000). The request, filed on May 15 2026, is now open for public inspection and comment through FERC’s eLibrary and eFiling systems.

Stakeholders—including residents, businesses, and environmental groups—have until 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on July 27, 2026, to file protests, motions to intervene, or comments. No filing fee is required, and FERC encourages electronic submissions. If no protest is filed within the deadline, the relocation will be deemed authorized the following day.

Key Elements

• Project Scope: Relocation of ~2 mi of 16‑inch pipeline and upgrade of Clinton Town Border meter setting.
  
• Location: Douglas County, Kansas (Clinton Town Border & Pipeline ES Relocation Project).
  
• Purpose: Accommodate the Kansas DOT South Lawrence Trafficway improvements.
  
• Cost: Approximately $19 million.
  
• Regulatory Basis: Request under sections 157.205 and 157.208 of FERC regulations, under the Natural Gas Act, and within Southern Star’s blanket certificate (Docket CP82‑479‑000).
  
• Public Participation:
  
  • Protests: May be filed by any person; if none filed by July 27, the request is deemed authorized.
    
  • Interventions: Motion to intervene must be filed by July 27; successful intervenors gain rights to challenge orders.
    
  • Comments: May be submitted by anyone; do not confer party status.
    
• Deadlines: All protests, interventions, and comments due by 5:00 p.m. ET on July 27, 2026.
  
• Filing Options: Electronic filing via FERC’s eFiling or eComment systems; paper filings accepted at the Commission’s offices.
  
• Access to Information: Full request documents available in PDF and Word on FERC’s eLibrary; service list and docket details accessible through eService.
  
• No Filing Fees: Participation is free of charge.

Joshua Klein’s Cape Horn Mill Project: A 40‑kW Conduit Hydropower Facility Under Review

Overview
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has issued a preliminary determination that Joshua Klein’s proposed Cape Horn Mill Project in Colfax, California, qualifies as a conduit hydropower facility under the Federal Power Act (FPA). The project will install a single 40‑kilowatt turbine on the Boardman Canal, using a 10‑inch pipeline to divert and return water. It is expected to generate roughly 280 megawatt‑hours of electricity annually, a modest contribution that would not alter the canal’s primary agricultural, municipal, or industrial water‑distribution purpose.

The determination rests on four FPA criteria: (1) the facility uses a man‑made conduit (tunnel, canal, pipeline, etc.) that is already in place for water distribution; (2) it relies solely on the hydroelectric potential of that conduit; (3) its installed capacity does not exceed 40 megawatts; and (4) it was not licensed or exempted under Part I of the FPA before August 9, 2013. Because all these conditions are met, the project is exempt from the usual licensing process.

FERC is now inviting the public to comment or file motions to intervene by June 22, 2026, 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time. Comments must be submitted electronically through FERC’s eFiling or eComment systems, or by mail to the Commission’s offices. The notice outlines formatting requirements and provides contact information for assistance.

Key Elements

• Project name & location: Cape Horn Mill Project, Boardman Canal, near Colfax, Placer County, California.
  
• Installed capacity: 40 kW turbine.
  
• Estimated annual generation: ~280 MWh.
  
• Conduit type: 10‑inch pipeline within an existing canal system.
  
• FPA qualifying criteria met:
  
  • Uses a man‑made water conveyance for distribution.
    
  • Generates power solely from the conduit’s hydro potential.
    
  • Capacity ≤ 40 MW.
    
  • Not previously licensed or exempted before 2013.
    
• Public comment period: June 22, 2026 (deadline for comments, contesting qualification, or motions to intervene).
  
• Filing methods:
  
  • Electronic filing via FERC eFiling/eComment (no prior registration needed for brief comments).
    
  • Paper filing to the Secretary, FERC, Washington, DC or Rockville, MD.
    
• Formatting requirements: All capital letters for headings (“COMMENTS”, “COMMENTS CONTESTING QUALIFICATION FOR A CONDUIT HYDROPOWER FACILITY”, or “MOTION TO INTERVENE”), include applicant name, project number, filer’s contact info, and comply with 18 CFR 385.2001‑2005.
  
• Contact information:
  
  • Office of Public Participation: (202) 502‑6595.
    
  • FERC Online Support: (866) 208‑3676 (toll‑free) or (202) 502‑8659 (TTY).
    
• Access to documents: Available online via FERC’s website by entering docket number CD26‑2.
  

This notice provides an opportunity for stakeholders—local residents, environmental groups, water users, and industry participants—to influence the development of a small‑scale hydropower project that leverages existing water infrastructure without requiring a full FERC license.

New York Power Authority Seeks Public Input on Vischer Ferry Hydroelectric Project Environmental Assessment

Overview

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has released an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Vischer Ferry Hydroelectric Project, a 4679‑050 license renewal located on the Mohawk River in Saratoga and Schenectady counties, New York. The assessment, prepared under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), evaluates the potential environmental impacts of continuing to operate and maintain the hydroelectric facility.

The EA concludes that, with appropriate environmental protective measures, licensing the project would not constitute a major federal action that significantly affects the quality of the human environment. Key protective measures include monitoring water quality, managing fish passage, and maintaining river flow regimes to preserve aquatic habitats.

Stakeholders and the general public are invited to review the EA through FERC’s eLibrary and to submit comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on June 22, 2026. Comments can be filed electronically via the eFiling system or sent by mail to the Commission’s offices. The Commission encourages electronic submissions and provides contact information for assistance.

Key Elements

• Project: Vischer Ferry Hydroelectric Project (License No. 4679‑050) on the Mohawk River, NY.
  
• EA Conclusion: No major federal action; licensing permissible with protective measures.
  
• Protective Measures: Water‑quality monitoring, fish‑passage management, flow‑regulation protocols.
  
• Public Access: EA available online via FERC eLibrary (docket number P‑4679‑050).
  
• Comment Period: Open until 5:00 p.m. ET, June 22, 2026.
  
• Submission Methods: eFiling (eComment) or paper mail to FERC, Washington, DC or Rockville, MD.
  
• Contact Points: Office of Public Participation (202‑502‑6595), FERC Online Support (866‑208‑3676).
  
• Regulatory Framework: NEPA, 18 CFR 380, FERC licensing authority.

BLM Opens Scoping for New Gold‑Silver Mine in Idaho’s Owyhee County

Overview

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has announced the start of a scoping process to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the DeLamar Mine Project in Owyhee County, Idaho. The project, proposed by DeLamar Mining Company (a subsidiary of Integra Resources), seeks to expand two existing open‑pit mines on Florida and DeLamar Mountains, adding roads, heap‑leach facilities, and storage structures. The EIS will evaluate how the proposed 19‑year operation—covering roughly 2,915 acres of disturbance—might affect public lands, water resources, wildlife, and cultural sites.

The BLM’s notice invites public comments and meetings (June 9 and 11, 2026) to shape the analysis. Comments must be submitted by June 29, 2026, to be considered in the final EIS, which is expected to be released in summer 2027. The agency will weigh the proposed Mine Plan of Operations (MPO) against alternatives, including a “no‑action” scenario that would maintain current permitted activities.

Key concerns highlighted in the notice include potential loss of native vegetation, habitat disruption, changes to surface and groundwater quality, sedimentation of streams, air emissions, visual impacts on culturally significant sites, and increased traffic. The BLM will coordinate with federal, state, and tribal partners to address environmental, endangered species, and historic preservation requirements under NEPA, the Endangered Species Act, and the National Historic Preservation Act.

Key Elements

• Regulatory Framework: NEPA, FLPMA, and Surface Management regulations guide the EIS and MPO review.
  
• Proposed Action: Expansion of open‑pit gold‑silver mining, construction of haul roads, heap‑leach facilities, rock storage, and ancillary infrastructure.
  
• Disturbance Area: 2,915 acres total (1,420 acres previously disturbed; 1,495 acres new), with 812 acres on BLM public land.
  
• Project Duration: Approximately 19 years of mining and associated activities.
  
• Alternatives:
  
  • No‑action: Continue current permitted operations under existing MPOs.
    
  • Modified configurations: Variations in mine layout and facility placement based on public scoping input.
    
• Anticipated Impacts:
  
  • Loss of native vegetation and soil erosion.
    
  • Habitat loss for wildlife and potential impacts on endangered species.
    
  • Alteration of surface and groundwater quality, including sedimentation of streams.
    
  • Air emissions and visual changes affecting cultural and historic resources.
    
  • Increased local traffic and infrastructure strain.
    
• Permits & Authorizations:
  
  • BLM Plan of Operations
    
  • Clean Water Act Section 404 (USACE)
    
  • Idaho Air Quality Permit (IDEQ)
    
  • Cyanidation Permit (IDEQ)
    
  • Idaho Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (IDEQ)
    
  • Additional state and county permits as required.
    
• Public Participation:
  
  • Scoping period ends June 29, 2026.
    
  • Public meetings on June 9 (Jordan Valley, OR) and June 11 (Marsing, ID).
    
  • Comments can be submitted online, by mail, or in person.
    
• Decision Timeline: EIS and Record of Decision projected for summer 2027.
  
• Stakeholder Engagement:
  
  • Consultation with Indian Tribal Nations under Executive Order 13175.
    
  • Coordination with federal, state, and local agencies for environmental, species, and historic preservation reviews.

Reno’s Lemmon Drive Revamp: Final Federal Approval for Flood‑Resilient Roadway

Overview

The U.S. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has issued final agency actions approving the Lemmon Drive Traffic Improvements and Resiliency Project in Reno, Nevada. The project realigns approximately 3.7 miles of Lemmon Drive between Fleetwood Drive and Ramsey Way, elevating the roadway above the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) 100‑year flood level. This design aims to maintain reliable community access, reduce travel delays, and enhance safety during flood events.

The notice also establishes a deadline for judicial review: claims against the FHWA’s actions must be filed by October 26, 2026, or within any shorter period specified by the underlying law. Environmental and regulatory compliance documents—including the Environmental Assessment (EA), Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), and related permits—have been finalized under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other federal statutes.

For stakeholders, the approval signals that the project has met stringent environmental, cultural, and safety standards, and that the roadway will be constructed with pedestrian access improvements and flood resilience in mind.

Key Elements

• Final Agency Actions: FHWA and other federal agencies have granted licenses, permits, and approvals for the Lemmon Drive realignment under 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1).
  
• Project Scope: 3.7 mi realignment along a natural earthen berm, elevating the road above FEMA 100‑year flood elevation.
  
• Flood Resilience: Design ensures reliable access during flood events, reducing travel delays and enhancing safety.
  
• Pedestrian Improvements: Added and improved pedestrian access along the corridor.
  
• Environmental Compliance: NEPA‑approved EA and FONSI (Jan 21 2026 and May 21 2026).
  
• Regulatory Framework: Compliance with Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, and other federal statutes.
  
• Judicial Review Deadline: Claims must be filed by Oct 26 2026 (or within any shorter statutory period).
  
• Public Access to Documents: Environmental assessment and project records available via the project website or NDOT’s Environmental Division.
  
• Stakeholder Contact: FHWA – Mr. Jacob Waclaw; NDOT – Mr. Chris Young.

BLM to File New Land Survey Maps in Oregon and Washington – What It Means for Land Management

Overview
The U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has announced that a series of plats of survey covering lands in Oregon and Washington will be officially filed on June 29, 2026. These detailed land maps were produced at the request of the BLM, U.S. Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National Park Service to support ongoing management of federal lands. The filing process is a formal step that records the precise boundaries and features of the surveyed parcels, ensuring that all federal agencies have a consistent, up‑to‑date reference for planning, conservation, and resource use.

The notice invites any interested party to protest the proposed filings by submitting a written notice of protest to the BLM Oregon/Washington State Director no later than the scheduled filing date. If a protest is received on time, the filing will be paused pending review; otherwise, the plats will be recorded the following business day. The public can view the plats free of charge at the BLM Oregon State Office in Portland, and copies are available for purchase.

For geoscientists, natural resource managers, and professionals in energy and mineral sectors, these updated plats provide critical spatial data that underpin decisions about land use, habitat protection, and resource extraction. Accurate cadastral information supports everything from watershed modeling to infrastructure development, making the filing a foundational step for responsible stewardship of the region’s natural assets.

Key Elements

• Official filing date: June 29, 2026 (30 calendar days after publication).
  
• Protest deadline: Must be received by the BLM Oregon State Office before the filing date; untimely protests are not considered.
  
• Agencies involved: BLM, U.S. Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service.
  
• Survey locations: Multiple tracts in Oregon (Willamette Meridian) and Washington, including sections 3–4, 8–9, 22–35, 15–22, 26, 16–21, and 5–7–15.
  
• Access to plats: Viewable free of charge at the BLM Oregon State Office; copies available for purchase.
  
• Contact: Robert Femling, Branch Chief of Geographic Sciences, BLM Oregon/Washington (phone: 503‑808‑6633, email: provided).
  
• Legal basis: Authority under 43 U.S.C., Chapter 3.
  
• Implications for land management: Provides precise boundary data essential for conservation planning, resource extraction permitting, and infrastructure development across the Pacific Northwest.

Reopening the Debate: EPA’s Federal Permit Program for Coal Combustion Residuals

Overview

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is reopening the comment period on its 2020 proposed rule that would establish a federal permit program for the disposal of coal combustion residuals (CCR) generated by electric utilities. The rule aims to create a consistent, nationwide framework that ensures CCR are disposed of safely, protecting groundwater, soil, and air quality while supporting responsible waste management practices.

The proposed program would require utilities and other generators to obtain federal permits before disposing of CCR, setting clear standards for site selection, construction, operation, and closure. It also seeks to harmonize federal oversight with existing state and local regulations, reducing duplication and providing a single point of accountability for large-scale CCR disposal operations.

By extending the comment period until June 29 2026, the EPA invites stakeholders—including utilities, waste managers, environmental groups, and the public—to shape the final rule. Comments will influence key aspects such as permitting criteria, monitoring requirements, and the balance between regulatory rigor and operational feasibility.

Key Elements

• Federal Permit Requirement – CCR disposal sites must secure a federal permit under the proposed rule, establishing uniform standards across the country.
  
• Regulatory Scope – The rule applies to electric utilities and other generators of CCR, covering both hazardous and non‑hazardous waste streams.
  
• Compliance Framework – Permits will incorporate requirements from 40 CFR Parts 22, 124, and 257, including site selection, construction, monitoring, and closure criteria.
  
• Stakeholder Input – The reopened comment period (now open until June 29 2026) allows industry, environmental NGOs, and the public to influence permitting thresholds, reporting obligations, and enforcement mechanisms.
  
• Environmental Safeguards – The program emphasizes protection of groundwater, soil, and air, with monitoring plans designed to detect and mitigate potential contamination.
  
• Integration with State Rules – The federal framework is intended to complement, not replace, existing state and local regulations, providing a consistent baseline while respecting regional differences.
  
• Economic and Operational Impact – The rule will affect the cost structure for utilities and waste managers, potentially influencing site selection, transportation logistics, and long‑term liability.
  
• Transparency and Accountability – Permit holders will be required to submit regular reports, and the EPA will maintain a public docket to ensure transparency in decision‑making.

EU Tightens Grip on Chinese Graphite Electrodes: Final Anti‑Dumping Duty Takes Effect

Overview

Graphite electrode systems are critical components in high‑temperature industrial processes such as aluminum smelting and steel production. In 2022 the European Commission imposed a provisional anti‑dumping duty on imports of these products from the People’s Republic of China to protect EU manufacturers from unfair pricing. The 2026 corrigendum confirms that the duty is now definitive and that the provisional duty will be collected permanently.

The corrigendum also corrects and updates the annex listing the Chinese exporting producers that were not sampled during the initial investigation. This list, identified by specific TARIC additional codes, provides the precise companies subject to the duty and clarifies the scope of the measure.

For stakeholders in the geoscience, energy, and mineral resources sectors, the definitive duty means a lasting tariff barrier on Chinese graphite electrodes, potentially reshaping supply chains, influencing raw‑material sourcing decisions, and affecting the cost structure of EU‑based high‑temperature industries.

Key Elements

• Definitive anti‑dumping duty: Permanent tariff imposed on Chinese graphite electrode systems.
  
• Collection of provisional duty: The provisional duty collected in 2022 is now formally collected as part of the definitive measure.
  
• Updated producer list: Annex lists 42 Chinese companies (e.g., Anshan Carbon Co., Ltd., Asahi Fine Carbon Dalian Co., Ltd.) with TARIC additional codes (C735–C762).
  
• Scope of duty: Applies to all imports of graphite electrode systems originating from the listed producers.
  
• Compliance requirements: Importers must declare the duty and ensure proper tariff classification under the updated TARIC codes.
  
• Impact on EU industry: Aims to level the playing field for EU manufacturers of graphite electrodes and related high‑temperature equipment.
  
• Geoscience relevance: Highlights the importance of raw‑material sourcing and trade policy in the broader context of mineral resource management and industrial sustainability.

DRBC Raises Water Fees and Charges in Line with Inflation

Overview

The Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC) has issued a final rule that revises its regulatory program fees and water‑charge schedule for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2026. The adjustments are tied to the 4.8 % increase in the April 12‑month Consumer Price Index for Philadelphia, ensuring that the Commission’s fees keep pace with inflation.

The rule updates fee tables for a range of activities—including water allocation, wastewater discharge, and other project types—while also setting new rates for consumptive and non‑consumptive surface‑water withdrawals. The revised schedule is effective immediately and can be accessed through the DRBC website or by contacting the Commission’s finance office.

For stakeholders in the geoscience, energy, and natural‑resource sectors, the changes mean higher costs for projects that require water‑use permits or involve wastewater discharge. The updated rates also reflect the Commission’s ongoing effort to balance regional water‑resource management with economic realities across the Delaware River Basin’s four member states.

Key Elements

• Inflation‑linked adjustment: All regulatory program fees and water‑charge rates are increased by the 4.8 % CPI rise for 2026.
  
• Water allocation fee: $551 per million gallons per month of allocation (up to a maximum of $20,670), doubled for any portion exported from the basin.
  
• Wastewater discharge fees:
  
  • Private projects: $1,378 per month (or alternative review fee).
    
  • Public projects: $689 per month (or alternative review fee).
    
• Other project fees: 0.4 % of project cost up to $10 million plus 0.12 % above that, capped at $103,352 (or greater of that amount or alternative review fee).
  
• Water‑use charges:
  
  • Consumptive use: $110 per million gallons.
    
  • Non‑consumptive use: $1.10 per million gallons.
    
• Additional fees:
  
  • Emergency approval: $5,000.
    
  • Late‑filed renewal surcharge: $2,000.
    
  • Name change: $1,378.
    
  • Change of ownership: $2,067.
    
• Accessibility: Revised fee schedules are published in the Federal Register and available on the DRBC website or by contacting the Commission’s Director of Finance and Administration.

St. Cloud Hydroelectric Project Gets Green Light: Environmental Assessment Released

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has made available the Environmental Assessment (EA) for a new major license to continue operating the St. Cloud Hydroelectric Project on the Mississippi River in Minnesota. The EA, prepared under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), evaluates the potential environmental impacts of the project and concludes that, with appropriate protective measures, the license would not constitute a major federal action that significantly affects the quality of the human environment.

The assessment is publicly accessible through FERC’s eLibrary and invites stakeholders to review the findings and submit comments. The public comment period closes on June 22, 2026, and FERC encourages electronic submissions via its eFiling and eComment systems, though paper comments may also be mailed to the Commission’s offices.

Key Elements - Project Scope: St. Cloud Hydroelectric Project No. 4108, located on the Mississippi River across Stearns, Benton, and Sherburne counties.
- License Type: New major license to continue operation and maintenance of the hydroelectric facility.
- Environmental Assessment Findings: The EA concludes that licensing, with proper environmental safeguards, would not be a major federal action under NEPA.
- Protective Measures: Recommended environmental protections to mitigate potential impacts on water quality, fish and wildlife, and downstream ecosystems.
- Public Participation: Comments accepted until 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time, June 22, 2026; electronic filing preferred, paper filing also accepted.
- Access to EA: Available via FERC’s eLibrary (docket number P‑4108) and can be printed or viewed online.
- Contact Information: FERC Online Support (866‑208‑3676 or 202‑502‑8659 TTY), Office of Public Participation (202‑502‑6595), and Secretary Debbie‑Anne A. Reese for filing inquiries.
- Regulatory Framework: FERC’s review follows 18 CFR part 380 and NEPA requirements, ensuring compliance with federal environmental standards.

Green Mountain Power’s One‑Year Water‑Quality Certification Deadline

Overview

Green Mountain Power Corporation (GMP) has submitted a request for a Clean Water Act Section 401(a)(1) water‑quality certification to the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) for a project overseen by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The Department of Energy and FERC have issued a formal notice confirming that the DEC received this request on May 8, 2026.

The notice establishes a one‑year period—until May 8, 2027—during which the DEC must review and act on the certification. If the DEC fails to approve or deny the request within that timeframe, the certification is deemed waived under the Clean Water Act, allowing GMP to proceed with its project without the formal water‑quality approval.

This procedural step is critical for ensuring that large energy projects meet federal water‑quality standards before construction or operation. The waiver provision underscores the importance of timely environmental review and the potential for significant ecological and regulatory consequences if the DEC does not act within the prescribed period.

Key Elements

• Parties Involved: Green Mountain Power Corporation, Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation, U.S. Department of Energy, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
  
• Request Date: May 8, 2026 – DEC received GMP’s water‑quality certification request.
  
• Deadline: May 8, 2027 – DEC must act on the request within one year.
  
• Waiver Condition: Failure to act by the deadline triggers a waiver of the certification under Clean Water Act § 401(a)(1).
  
• Regulatory References: 18 CFR 4.34(b)(5)(iii), 18 CFR 2.1, 33 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1).
  
• Implications: Waiver allows GMP to proceed without formal water‑quality approval, potentially impacting local water bodies and environmental compliance.
  
• Notice Status: Active (Document 2026‑10500, published May 27, 2026).

NRC Considers Renewing NuFuels’ 20‑Year License to Mine Uranium In‑Situ Near New Mexico’s Crownpoint

Overview

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has opened a public docket to review a renewal application from NuFuels, Inc., a subsidiary of Laramide Resources. The application seeks to extend Source and Byproduct Materials License SUA‑1580, which would allow NuFuels to operate the Crownpoint Uranium Project (CUP) In‑Situ Recovery Facility for an additional 20 years. The CUP facility has not yet been constructed; the renewal would authorize the development of a network of satellite processing sites and a central plant in McKinley County, New Mexico.

NuFuels plans to extract uranium from the Westwater Canyon Member of the Morrison Formation using in‑situ recovery (ISR) techniques. The process involves circulating a leaching solution through the rock, recovering uranium‑bearing solutions at satellite sites equipped with pressurized down‑flow ion‑exchange columns, and transporting the loaded resin to the central plant for further processing and drying. Each satellite facility is designed to handle up to one million pounds of triuranium octoxide (U₃O₈) per year.

The NRC will conduct a technical review and a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) assessment before deciding whether to issue the renewal. Interested parties have until July 27, 2026 to file a hearing request or petition to intervene. The NRC also provides guidance on electronic filing and public access to documents through its ADAMS system.

Key Elements

• License Renewal Scope: Extension of SUA‑1580 for 20 years, enabling operation of the CUP In‑Situ Recovery Facility.
• Project Location: McKinley County, New Mexico, centered on the Crownpoint, Unit 1, and Church Rock Section 8 project areas.
• In‑Situ Recovery Method: Circulation of leaching solution through the Westwater Canyon Member of the Morrison Formation to dissolve uranium.
• Processing Infrastructure:
  • Three satellite facilities (Crownpoint, Unit 1, Church Rock Section 8) using pressurized down‑flow ion‑exchange columns.
  • Central Plant (Crownpoint Central Plant) for resin processing and drying.
  • Each satellite designed for up to 1 million lb U₃O₈/year capacity.
• Environmental Review: NRC will prepare a NEPA environmental document as part of the renewal process.
• Public Participation: Opportunity to request a hearing or petition to intervene by July 27, 2026; digital filing procedures and access to documents via ADAMS.
• Regulatory Framework: Application submitted under 10 CFR parts 2 and 40; NRC will assess compliance with the Atomic Energy Act and NRC regulations before issuing the license.

PG &E’s Water‑Quality Certification Deadline: One Year to Act or Waive

Overview

Pacific Gas & Electric (PG &E) has requested a Clean Water Act Section 401(a)(1) water‑quality certification for a project submitted on April 20, 2026. The California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) received the request and, under Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) regulations, has been formally notified that it must act on the certification within one year—by April 20, 2027.

If the SWRCB fails to approve or deny the certification by that date, the authority to issue the certification is deemed waived, effectively allowing the project to proceed without the required water‑quality clearance. This mechanism ensures timely decision‑making while protecting water resources under the Clean Water Act.

The notice underscores the interplay between state water‑quality agencies and federal energy regulators, highlighting how administrative timelines can influence the development of energy infrastructure projects that may impact aquatic ecosystems.

Key Elements

• Request Origin: PG &E’s water‑quality certification request dated April 20, 2026.
  
• Regulatory Framework: Governed by FERC’s 18 CFR 4.201(e) and Clean Water Act § 401(a)(1).
  
• Deadline: One‑year period ending April 20, 2027.
  
• Waiver Provision: If the SWRCB does not act by the deadline, the certification authority is waived, allowing the project to proceed without a water‑quality certification.
  
• Authority Source: Notice issued by FERC Secretary Debbie‑Anne A. Reese, citing 18 CFR 2.1.
  
• Implications: The decision (or lack thereof) directly affects the project’s compliance with federal water‑quality standards and its potential environmental impact.

White River National Forest Pulls Back Camp Hale Restoration Project

Overview

The White River National Forest has officially withdrawn its notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Camp Hale Restoration and Enhancement Project in Eagle County, Colorado. The project, originally slated for the Eagle‑Holy Cross Ranger District, aimed to reassess and potentially enhance resource management within the area, including forest health, recreation, and wildlife habitat.

This withdrawal means that the Forest Service will not proceed with the formal EIS process at this time. Instead, the agency is re‑evaluating the resource needs and overall feasibility of the project before deciding whether to move forward with a new environmental assessment or alternative planning steps.

The decision reflects a pause in development activities and a commitment to carefully consider environmental, social, and economic impacts before any further action. Stakeholders and interested parties are encouraged to contact Cary Green, the NEPA Coordinator, for updates or to provide input on the re‑evaluation process.

Key Elements

• Agency & Action: Forest Service (U.S. Department of Agriculture) has withdrawn its notice of intent to prepare an EIS.
  
• Project Location: Camp Hale area, Eagle‑Holy Cross Ranger District, Eagle County, Colorado.
  
• Purpose of Withdrawal: Re‑evaluate resource needs and project feasibility before proceeding.
  
• No Immediate EIS: The formal environmental assessment will not be conducted until a new notice is issued.
  
• Contact Information: Cary Green (NEPA Coordinator) – email or phone (970‑390‑3234); relay service 711 available.
  
• Public Participation: Stakeholders can still provide input during the re‑evaluation period.
  
• Regulatory Context: The withdrawal follows the original notice published March 16, 2015 (FRN 2015‑05895).

Expanding the Freedom to Build: New Rules for Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines

Overview

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), in partnership with the Department of Energy (DOE), has issued a proposed rule to revise its blanket certificate program. The goal is to streamline the approval process for interstate natural‑gas pipeline projects by allowing a broader range of projects to proceed without a case‑specific authorization order.

Key changes include higher cost thresholds for projects that qualify under the blanket certificate, expanded definitions of eligible pipeline activities, and simplified procedural requirements. The revisions aim to reduce regulatory delays, lower administrative costs, and encourage investment in the natural‑gas infrastructure that supports the U.S. energy supply chain.

Stakeholders—including pipeline operators, environmental groups, and local communities—are invited to comment by July 27, 2026. The rule will affect how geoscientists, engineers, and natural‑resource managers assess pipeline routes, environmental impacts, and compliance with federal regulations.

Key Elements

• Broader Project Scope – Expands the types of pipeline construction activities that can be covered by a blanket certificate, including certain expansions, relocations, and new construction segments.
  
• Higher Cost Limits – Raises the monetary threshold for projects eligible for blanket certification, allowing larger‑scale developments to bypass individual authorization orders.
  
• Simplified Approval Process – Reduces the number of required filings and streamlines the review timeline, potentially shortening project lead times.
  
• Geoscience and Environmental Considerations – While the rule eases procedural hurdles, it still requires compliance with environmental review standards (e.g., NEPA) and permits related to land use, water resources, and wildlife habitats.
  
• Stakeholder Engagement – Provides a clear comment period and filing instructions, encouraging input from industry, scientists, and the public on the proposed changes.
  
• Interagency Coordination – The rule is jointly overseen by FERC and DOE, ensuring alignment between regulatory oversight and energy policy objectives.

EPA Softens HFC Phase‑Down Rules, Extending Deadlines and Giving Industry Flexibility

Overview

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has finalized a series of amendments to its 2023 Hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) phasedown rule under the American Innovation and Manufacturing (AIM) Act. The changes aim to balance the climate‑benefits of reducing high‑global‑warming‑potential refrigerants with the practical realities of supply chains, safety codes, and industry reliance interests. By revising compliance dates, relaxing installation limits, and clarifying technical requirements, the EPA seeks to avoid stranded inventory, reduce costs for consumers and businesses, and maintain progress toward the AIM Act’s HFC reduction targets.

The rule extends compliance deadlines for several critical subsectors: semiconductor‑process chillers and integrated product refrigeration (IPR) units to January 1 2030, laboratory centrifuges and shakers to January 1 2028, and intermodal refrigerated transport temperature thresholds to –35 °C. It also removes the installation deadline for residential and light‑commercial air‑conditioning/heat‑pump units manufactured or imported before January 1 2025, allowing continued use of legacy R‑410A equipment. Supermarket and cold‑storage refrigeration systems receive a graduated GWP schedule—an interim 1,400‑GWP limit until 2032, followed by stricter 150‑ or 300‑GWP limits—along with a 15 % capacity‑increase allowance that does not trigger a new‑system requirement.

Economically, the EPA estimates engineering cost savings of roughly $976 million in present value (PV) and $56 million per year in expected annual value (EAV) under a 3 % discount rate, driven by the flexibility to choose lower‑cost refrigerants. Non‑monetized benefits include preserving semiconductor wafer production, national‑security gains, and reduced emissions. The rule acknowledges that supermarkets may pass some savings onto consumers, potentially raising food prices, but overall HFC production remains capped by the AIM Act’s phasedown schedule.

Key Elements

• Extended Compliance Dates

  • Semiconductor chillers and IPR units: Jan 1 2030.
    
  • Laboratory centrifuges and shakers: Jan 1 2028.
    
  • Intermodal refrigerated transport: temperature threshold raised to –35 °C.
    

• Legacy Equipment Exemption

  • Residential/light‑commercial AC/heat‑pump units manufactured or imported before Jan 1 2025 may continue to be installed and used.
    

• Supermarket & Cold‑Storage Flexibility

  • Interim GWP limit of 1,400 lb for supermarket systems until 2032.
    
  • 150‑ or 300‑lb limits take effect Jan 1 2032.
    
  • 15 % capacity increase allowed without re‑classifying the system.
    
  • Cold‑storage warehouses: interim 700‑lb limit, 150/300‑lb limits by 2032.
    

• Technical Clarifications

  • Distinction between “capacity” (total cooling output) and “load” (actual demand).
    
  • Condensing units exempt from new installation restrictions but still subject to use limits.
    

• Economic Impact

  • Estimated $976 million PV and $56 million EAV in engineering cost savings (3 % discount).
    
  • Potential consumer price impacts in thin‑margin sectors like supermarkets.
    

• Environmental & National‑Security Considerations

  • Supports semiconductor manufacturing continuity, national‑security‑critical supply chains, and broader HFC reduction goals.
    
  • Maintains overall HFC production caps under the AIM Act’s phasedown schedule.

“Nuclear Shipping Gets a Green Light: Urenco USA’s 10 % Enrichment Exemption”

Overview

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has approved a limited exemption that allows Louisiana Energy Services, doing business as Urenco USA, to transport uranium hexafluoride (UF₆) enriched to more than 5 % but less than 10 % U‑235 using its existing DN30 transportation packages. The exemption covers roughly 40–50 cylinders in 2026–2027 and is intended to bridge a short‑term gap while awaiting the arrival of a new, approved high‑assay low‑enriched uranium (HALEU) package design.

The decision follows a revised environmental assessment that found no significant environmental impacts. NRC staff confirmed that the modified shipments would not increase radiation exposure to the public or workers beyond established limits, and that the packages would remain subcritical under all expected transport conditions.

This move supports the broader nuclear industry’s push toward HALEU fuels, which can improve reactor safety and efficiency. By permitting the use of existing packaging for slightly higher enrichment levels, Urenco USA can meet customer commitments without compromising safety or the environment.

Key Elements

• Exemption Scope: Allows use of 30B UF₆ cylinders in certified DN30 packages for enrichment levels >5 % U‑235 but <10 % U‑235.
  
• Limited Use: Approximately 40–50 cylinders in 2026–2027, shipped to a single customer.
  
• No Design Changes: The DN30 package remains unchanged; only the content enrichment level is increased.
  
• Environmental Findings: NRC’s revised environmental assessment and FONSI conclude no significant impact on human or environmental health.
  
• Safety Assurance: Dose‑rate and criticality analyses confirm compliance with NRC’s part 71 safety standards.
  
• Industry Context: Supports the transition to HALEU fuels, which are key to accident‑tolerant and extended‑fuel‑cycle reactor designs.
  
• Regulatory Framework: Exemption granted under 10 CFR 71.12, waiving specific CoC requirements (71.17©(2) and (3)).
  
• Stakeholder Input: Comments from New Mexico and Washington states were considered; no changes were made to the assessment.
  
• Documentation Access: All related NRC documents are publicly available through the NRC docket system (NRC‑2026‑1156).

Venice Gathering Seeks an Extra Year to Wrap Up Pipeline Abandonment Amid Permit Delays

Overview

Venice Gathering System, L.L.C. has requested the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) extend the deadline for abandoning its Venice Gathering System Pipeline in Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana, from April 17 2026 to April 17 2027. The extension is needed because the company has not yet secured the necessary federal permits—specifically Regulations and Enforcement Authorizations from the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM)—to begin abandonment activities.

The notice invites public comment and intervention for 15 calendar days, allowing stakeholders to express support or concerns about the request. FERC will evaluate whether the company has demonstrated “good cause” for the delay and, if the request is contested, will issue a decision within 45 days. Importantly, the Commission will not revisit earlier decisions regarding the pipeline’s approval or environmental analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

This extension request reflects the broader regulatory environment for offshore and coastal energy projects, where permitting timelines can significantly impact project schedules and environmental compliance obligations.

Key Elements

• Extension Request: Deadline moved from April 17 2026 to April 17 2027 for abandonment of the Venice Gathering System Pipeline.
  
• Reason for Delay: Pending BOEM Regulations and Enforcement Authorizations required to commence abandonment.
  
• Public Participation: 15‑day intervention and comment period; comments accepted electronically or in paper form.
  
• FERC Decision Process:
  
  • Uncontested requests handled by the Director of the Office of Energy Projects.
    
  • Contested requests reviewed within 45 days, focusing solely on the extension’s “good cause.”
    
• No Re‑litigation: FERC will not re‑evaluate the original certificate of public convenience and necessity or the NEPA analysis.
  
• Legal Framework: Governed by 18 CFR 385.²¹⁴⁄₂₁₁ and 18 CFR 157.10; parties may file motions to intervene.
  
• Documentation: Notice published in the Federal Register (Doc. 2026‑10397) and available on FERC’s eLibrary.
  
• Stakeholder Contact: Public inquiries and filings handled by the Office of Public Participation (phone: 202‑502‑6595).

Owyhee Irrigation Project Skips Big Environmental Review: NRCS Pulls EIS Notice

Overview

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has officially rescinded its earlier notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Owyhee Irrigation District Infrastructure Modernization Project in Malheur County, Oregon. The decision, announced on May 26 2026, follows a review that concluded the proposed measures do not warrant the extensive analysis required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

The project, which aims to upgrade irrigation infrastructure along the Owyhee and Snake Rivers near Nyssa, Oregon, remains in development. While the EIS will not be prepared, the NRCS will continue the watershed planning process under the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act and the Flood Control Act, producing an Environmental Assessment instead. Public comments from the original scoping period will still be considered in the final watershed plan.

This change reflects a streamlined approach to environmental review for projects that meet certain thresholds, allowing the NRCS to allocate resources more efficiently while maintaining NEPA compliance through a less detailed assessment.

Key Elements

• Rescission of EIS Notice: NRCS cancels the 2025 notice of intent to prepare an EIS for the Owyhee project.
  
• No EIS Required: Determination that project measures fall below the threshold necessitating a full EIS.
  
• Continued Watershed Planning: Project remains under development, guided by the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act of 1954 and the Flood Control Act of 1944.
  
• Environmental Assessment: NEPA compliance will be achieved via an Environmental Assessment rather than a full EIS.
  
• Public Input: Comments received during the original scoping period will inform the ongoing watershed plan.
  
• Effective Upon Publication: The rescission takes effect immediately upon release in the Federal Register.
  
• Contact Information: Gary Diridoni (NRCS) and USDA Target Center for alternative communication methods.

2027 Energy & Water Appropriations: A Multi‑Billion‑Dollar Blueprint for U.S. Infrastructure, Innovation, and Environmental Stewardship

Overview

The Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2027 (H.R. 9022) allocates federal funds for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2027 to a broad coalition of agencies that shape the nation’s water, energy, and environmental landscape. The bill provides billions of dollars to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Reclamation, the Department of Energy’s critical‑minerals, nuclear, and clean‑energy programs, and a host of independent agencies such as the Appalachian Regional Commission and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Key objectives include:
* Water infrastructure and flood‑control – financing the construction, rehabilitation, and operation of rivers, harbors, and inland waterways, with a focus on flood‑damage reduction, shore protection, and aquatic‑ecosystem restoration.
* Energy innovation and security – funding research, development, and deployment of critical minerals, advanced nuclear reactors, geothermal and hydrocarbon technologies, and cybersecurity measures for the energy sector.
* Environmental stewardship – supporting remediation of contaminated sites, nuclear‑waste management, and conservation projects across the country.
* Administrative and oversight safeguards – imposing strict reprogramming limits, reporting requirements, and restrictions on the use of funds for new programs or large‑scale contracts without congressional approval.

The act reflects a continued federal commitment to modernizing infrastructure, advancing clean‑energy technology, and protecting natural resources while ensuring fiscal discipline and transparency.

Key Elements

• Corps of Engineers (Civil Works)

  • $6.25 B for operation, maintenance, and construction of flood‑control, harbor, and shoreline projects.
    
  • $2.38 B for construction of authorized projects, with $70 M from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund and 25 % from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund.
    
  • $175 M for investigations, surveys, and studies related to river and harbor projects.
    
  • Reprogramming limits: 15 % of base amounts for construction, 25 % for investigations, unlimited for emergency O&M.

• Bureau of Reclamation

  • $1.68 B for water‑resource development, restoration, and facility operations, including transfers to Colorado River Basin funds.
    
  • $23 M for the Central Utah Project Completion Act and $32 M for the California Bay‑Delta Restoration Program.
    
  • $64 M for policy and administration, with a cap of $5 k on official reception expenses.

• Department of Energy (DOE)

  • $1.85 B for critical‑minerals and energy‑innovation programs, with $177 M earmarked for program direction.
    
  • $190 M for cybersecurity, energy security, and emergency response, with $24 M for program direction.
    
  • $235 M for electricity research and development, $21 M for program direction.
    
  • $1.80 B for nuclear energy R&D, $92 M for program direction.
    
  • $700 M for hydrocarbons and geothermal research, $75 M for program direction.
    
  • Additional allocations for strategic petroleum reserve, nuclear waste disposal, and advanced technology loan guarantees.

• Independent Agencies

  • $200 M for the Appalachian Regional Commission, $32 M for the Delta Regional Authority, $18 M for the Denali Commission, and $42 M for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s salaries and expenses.
    
  • $14 M for the Office of the Inspector General and $4 M for the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board.

• Reprogramming and Oversight

  • Strict limits on reprogramming: 15 % for construction, 25 % for investigations, unlimited for emergency O&M, with mandatory congressional notification for changes exceeding $5 M or 10 %.
    
  • Prohibitions on initiating new programs or large contracts without prior approval.
    
  • Detailed quarterly reporting requirements for DOE and independent agencies.
    
  • Restrictions on using funds for high‑hazard nuclear facilities or projects exceeding $100 M without independent cost estimates.

• Environmental and Energy‑Security Safeguards

  • Provisions to prevent the sale of Strategic Petroleum Reserve oil to entities linked to the Chinese Communist Party.
    
  • Limits on using funds for nuclear‑waste storage agreements that lack state or tribal consent.
    
  • Mandates that all nuclear‑related projects meet independent safety and cost‑estimate requirements.

• General Provisions

  • Funds cannot be used to influence congressional action on pending legislation.
    
  • Transfer restrictions between agencies are tightly controlled, with semi‑annual reporting on any transfers.
    
  • The act includes specific language to ensure that any computer network funded by the act does not facilitate the distribution of pornography, while exempting law‑enforcement uses.

This appropriations package represents a comprehensive investment in the nation’s water and energy infrastructure, balancing innovation with rigorous oversight to protect public resources and national security.

Expanding Conservation, Enabling Water Pipeline: The Sloan Canyon Act

Overview

The Sloan Canyon Conservation and Lateral Pipeline Act amends the Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area Act to enlarge the protected area from 48,438 acres to 57,728 acres and to update the official boundary map. The bill also creates a new right‑of‑way for the Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) to construct and operate a water transmission pipeline that runs outside the conservation area’s boundaries.

The act grants the SNWA temporary and permanent rights to the pipeline corridor, powerlines, facilities, and access roads depicted on the new map. These rights are granted without the payment of rents or other charges, and the Authority may excavate and dispose of sand, gravel, minerals, or other materials from the pipeline tunneling, subject to a memorandum of understanding with the Secretary of the Interior. Conditions are imposed to protect conservation resources, prohibit permanent adverse impacts, and ensure the corridor does not cross wilderness areas.

Management of the conservation area itself remains unchanged, and the expansion does not alter existing utility or transmission corridors. The bill was read twice in the Senate and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources for further consideration.

Key Elements

• Boundary Expansion: Increase from 48,438 to 57,728 acres; new map “Proposed Sloan Canyon Expansion” (May 20 2024).
  
• Pipeline Right‑of‑Way: Grants SNWA rights to water pipeline infrastructure, powerlines, facilities, and access roads outside the conservation area.
  
• No Rent or Charges: The Authority receives rights without payment of rents or other fees.
  
• Excavation & Disposal Rights: Authority may excavate and dispose of materials from pipeline tunneling, with a required memorandum of understanding.
  
• Protection Conditions:
  
  • Must include reasonable terms to safeguard conservation resources.
    
  • Pipeline construction cannot permanently damage surface resources.
    
  • Corridor cannot traverse wilderness areas.
    
• Preservation of Existing Corridors: Expansion respects pre‑existing utility transmission corridors and does not preclude authorized activities or new utility facilities within those corridors.
  
• Management Unchanged: All other management provisions of the Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area Act remain intact.
  
• Committee Referral: Bill referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources for further review.

Cape Fox Lands: Finalizing Alaska Native Claims and Unlocking Forest Resources

Overview

The Cape Fox Land Entitlement Finalization Act of 2025 is a federal law that completes the land‑settlement process for the Cape Fox Village Corporation of Saxman, Alaska. By waiving the core township requirement under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA), the bill allows Cape Fox to select approximately 180 acres of federal surface land within the Tongass National Forest without the usual township‑level conveyance restrictions.

Once the corporation submits a written notice of selection, the Secretary of the Interior must convey the surface estate to Cape Fox within 90 days, and the subsurface estate to the Sealaska Corporation within 180 days. These conveyances satisfy the entitlements of both entities under ANCSA, thereby finalizing their claims and clarifying ownership of the land and its mineral resources.

The act also preserves a public easement for access to inland National Forest System land, ensuring that while the land is transferred to the Native corporations, the public retains rights to traverse the area. The legislation balances the interests of the Native community, potential resource development, and public access, setting a clear legal framework for future land‑use planning and environmental stewardship in the region.

Key Elements

• Definitions: Clarifies terms such as “Cape Fox,” “Federal land,” and the specific map used for selection.
  
• Waiver of Core Township Requirement: Removes the need for Cape Fox to select or receive conveyance of the 185 acres that lie within the township of Saxman, easing the settlement process.
  
• Selection & Conveyance Timeline:
  
  • 90‑day window for Cape Fox to notify the Secretary of its selection.
    
  • 180‑day maximum for the Secretary to complete conveyances of surface and subsurface estates.
    
• Surface Estate Conveyance: Federal land is transferred to Cape Fox upon receipt of the written notice.
  
• Subsurface Estate Conveyance: The subsurface rights are conveyed to Sealaska Corporation, a regional Native corporation, ensuring shared resource interests.
  
• Public Easement: A reservation under ANCSA Section 17(b) guarantees public access to National Forest land inland from George Inlet, maintaining recreational and conservation values.
  
• Entitlement Fulfillment: The conveyances are deemed to satisfy Cape Fox’s entitlement under ANCSA Section 16 and Sealaska’s subsurface entitlement under Section 14(f).
  
• Geoscience & Resource Implications: The clarified ownership of surface and subsurface rights opens opportunities for responsible mineral exploration, forestry management, and environmental monitoring within the Tongass National Forest.

Tiny Tennessee Parcel Gets Federal Backing Gone: State Takes Full Control of 0.62‑Acre Forest Land and Its Minerals

Overview

Senate Bill S. 277, introduced by Senator Blackburn and reported without amendment, seeks to remove the United States’ reversionary interest in a 0.62‑acre parcel of Chickasaw State Forest in Chester County, Tennessee, and to transfer all federal mineral rights to the state. The move is prompted by a recent survey that found Bethel Baptist Church encroaching on the land by about 19 inches, prompting Congress to clear the federal stake so the state can resolve the encroachment issue.

The bill allows the Secretary of Agriculture to release the reversionary interest and convey the mineral rights “without consideration, appraisal, or environmental review.” The state will pay only the administrative costs incurred by the federal government in carrying out the release and conveyance. The transfer is intended to simplify ownership and potentially enable the state to manage or develop the land and its mineral resources without federal oversight.

For geoscientists, energy, and natural‑resource professionals, the key takeaway is that the state now holds both surface and subsurface rights to this parcel, but the bill does not require any exploratory drilling or environmental assessment before the state can decide how to use the minerals. The policy reflects a broader trend of reducing federal involvement in small, localized land parcels while shifting responsibility to state authorities.

Key Elements

• Release of Federal Reversionary Interest – The Secretary of Agriculture will relinquish the U.S. reversionary interest in the 0.62‑acre parcel, effective if the land ceases to serve public purposes.
  
• Conveyance of Mineral Rights – The federal mineral interest will be transferred to the state by quitclaim deed, with no warranty or consideration.
  
• No Appraisal or Environmental Review – The release and conveyance will occur without any appraisal, exploratory program, or environmental assessment.
  
• State Pays Administrative Costs – The state must reimburse the U.S. for any administrative expenses incurred during the release or conveyance.
  
• Contextual Background – The action addresses a 19‑inch encroachment by Bethel Baptist Church on state forest land, originally conveyed to Tennessee in 1955.
  
• Legislative Status – The bill is on the Senate calendar (General Orders, Calendar No. 207) and has been reported without amendment.

Expanding Sloan Canyon: New Pipeline Rights and Conservation Boundaries

The Sloan Canyon Conservation and Lateral Pipeline Act, enacted as Public Law No. 119‑91 in 2026, amends the Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area Act to enlarge the protected land and to facilitate a new water‑pipeline project. The law increases the conservation area from 48,438 acres to 57,728 acres, reflecting a broader commitment to preserve the region’s natural and cultural resources. At the same time, it grants the Southern Nevada Water Authority a temporary and permanent right‑of‑way for a lateral pipeline that will run outside the conservation area’s boundaries, allowing geotechnical investigations and the construction of water transmission infrastructure.

Key provisions balance development with stewardship. The pipeline right‑of‑way is granted without the payment of rents or other charges, but it is subject to strict conditions that protect surface resources, prohibit permanent adverse impacts, and exclude wilderness areas. The authority may excavate and dispose of materials from the pipeline’s tunneling, provided a memorandum of understanding is signed within 30 days to identify suitable federal land for disposal. Existing utility corridors and rights‑of‑way remain valid, and the expansion does not alter the overall management of the conservation area beyond the pipeline provisions.

Key Elements

• Boundary Expansion – The conservation area’s acreage is increased to 57,728 acres, with a new map titled “Proposed Sloan Canyon Expansion” (May 20, 2024).
  
• Pipeline Right‑of‑Way – The Southern Nevada Water Authority receives a right‑of‑way for a lateral pipeline outside the conservation area, covering water transmission, powerlines, facilities, and access roads.
  
• No Rent or Charges – The pipeline right‑of‑way is granted free of rent or other financial obligations.
  
• Geotechnical Investigations – The authority may conduct geotechnical studies within the right‑of‑way to support pipeline design and construction.
  
• Material Excavation and Disposal – The authority may excavate sand, gravel, minerals, or other materials from tunneling, and must enter a memorandum of understanding to identify federal land for disposal.
  
• Protection Conditions – The right‑of‑way must not permanently damage surface resources, must avoid wilderness areas, and may include reasonable terms to safeguard conservation values.
  
• Preservation of Existing Corridors – The expansion respects existing utility transmission corridors and rights‑of‑way, allowing continued operation, maintenance, and potential new facilities within those corridors.
  
• Management Continuity – Apart from the pipeline provisions, the conservation area’s management remains governed by the original Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area Act.
  
• Legal Framework – The act operates under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and other applicable statutes, ensuring environmental review and compliance.

Cape Fox Secures 180 Acres of Tongass Land, Balancing Native Rights and Forest Access

The Cape Fox Land Entitlement Finalization Act of 2025 finalizes a long‑standing land claim for the Cape Fox Village Corporation of Saxman, Alaska. By waiving the core township requirement, the law allows Cape Fox to acquire approximately 180 acres of surface land within the Tongass National Forest without the usual selection constraints. The act also delineates the transfer of subsurface mineral rights to Sealaska Corporation, ensuring that both surface and subsurface interests are resolved in accordance with the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA).

This legislation has broad implications for land use, resource management, and indigenous sovereignty in the region. The conveyance of surface land to Cape Fox opens opportunities for community development, sustainable resource extraction, and cultural stewardship, while the subsurface transfer to Sealaska preserves mineral resource interests. A public easement is reserved to maintain access to inland National Forest lands, balancing private entitlement with public use. The act also safeguards existing third‑party rights, ensuring that pre‑existing easements, reservations, and other encumbrances remain intact.

Key Elements - 180 acres of surface land within the Tongass National Forest transferred to Cape Fox within 90 days of selection notice.
- Subsurface mineral rights conveyed to Sealaska Corporation, fulfilling ANCSA entitlements for both entities.
- Waiver of core township requirement under ANCSA §16(b), allowing Cape Fox to select land outside the traditional township boundaries.
- Public easement reserved under ANCSA §17(b) to allow continued access to inland National Forest lands on Revillagigedo Island.
- Preservation of existing rights: conveyances subject to any valid existing easements, reservations, or rights‑of‑way as of enactment.
- Timeline: conveyances to be completed within 180 days of the Secretary’s receipt of Cape Fox’s written selection notice.
- Geoscience relevance: the act clarifies surface and subsurface ownership, impacting mineral exploration, forestry management, and environmental monitoring in the Tongass region.

EU Sets the Blueprint for Recycling Critical Materials: A New List of High‑Value Products and Wastes

Overview

The European Commission has adopted Regulation (EU) 2026/1116, an implementing act that lists the products, components and waste streams considered to have a relevant potential for recovering critical raw materials (CRMs). This list is part of the broader framework established by Regulation (EU) 2024/1252, which aims to secure a sustainable supply of CRMs through increased circularity. By identifying specific items that can be targeted for recovery, the regulation provides Member States with a concrete reference for designing national circularity programmes under Article 26(1) of ²⁰²⁴⁄₁₂₅₂.

The regulation is deliberately flexible: it does not preclude Member States from adding other products or waste streams to their national programmes, and the Commission reserves the right to update the list as technology and market conditions evolve. Extractive waste is excluded, as its recovery is already covered by a separate provision (Article 27 of ²⁰²⁴⁄₁₂₅₂).

Effective 20 days after publication in the Official Journal, Regulation 2026/1116 is binding across the EU. It covers a wide range of sectors—from batteries and electronic equipment to wind turbines, motor vehicles, energy and telecom infrastructure, industrial pumps and catalysts, as well as biowaste, sludges, and construction debris. The list is intended to guide industry, policymakers and researchers in prioritising recovery pathways for the most critical materials.

Key Elements

• Purpose: Provides a definitive catalogue of items with high CRM recovery potential to support national circularity strategies.
  
• Scope: Includes batteries (cathode/anode materials, current collectors, BMS, cables), electronic equipment (permanent magnets, hard drives, PCs, PV cells, printed circuit boards), wind turbines (magnets, generators, transformers), motor vehicles (traction motors, converters, wiring harnesses, catalytic converters, aluminium and magnesium parts), light transport, energy and telecom infrastructure, industrial pumps and catalysts.
  
• Waste streams: Digestate and compost from biowaste, various sludges and ashes (urban wastewater, municipal and industrial incineration), and construction/demolition waste rich in aluminium, copper, and cables.
  
• Exclusions: Extractive waste is not listed, as it is addressed elsewhere in the CRM framework.
  
• Flexibility: Member States may add additional items to their national programmes; the Commission may update the list to reflect technological progress.
  
• Legal status: Binding across all EU Member States, directly applicable, and part of the EU’s strategy to secure a resilient supply of critical raw materials.

EU Court to Judge Bulgaria Over Untreated Urban Wastewater: A Legal Battle for Clean Water

Overview
The European Commission has filed a case against the Republic of Bulgaria, alleging that the country has not met its obligations under the 1991 Directive on urban wastewater treatment. The Commission claims that several Bulgarian cities—most notably Plovdiv, Varna, and Ruse—have failed to install comprehensive collection systems, to provide required secondary treatment, and to apply more stringent tertiary treatment where discharges enter sensitive water bodies. The case, filed on 19 March 2026, seeks a declaration of infringement and an order for Bulgaria to pay the Commission’s costs.

If the Court rules in favor of the Commission, Bulgaria would be required to implement immediate measures to bring its wastewater infrastructure into compliance with EU law. This would involve significant investment in new treatment plants, upgrades to existing facilities, and stricter monitoring of discharges into rivers and coastal areas. The decision would also reinforce the EU’s commitment to protecting water quality and public health across member states.

The legal dispute underscores the importance of meeting EU environmental standards, especially for urban areas with populations over 10,000. It highlights how lapses in wastewater management can lead to cross‑border legal action and financial penalties, while also drawing attention to the broader impacts on ecosystems, tourism, and local economies.

Key Elements

• Directive 91/271/EEC: Requires member states to ensure all urban wastewater is collected, treated, and discharged in a manner that protects water resources.
• Article 3 (Collection): Bulgaria must have collection systems capable of capturing all wastewater in agglomerations over 10,000 people; deadline was 31 Dec 2010 (derogated for Bulgaria).
• Article 4 (Secondary Treatment): All collected wastewater must undergo secondary treatment before discharge; 20 Bulgarian agglomerations are cited as non‑compliant.
• Article 5 (Tertiary Treatment): Wastewater from large agglomerations discharging into sensitive areas must receive tertiary treatment (nitrogen and phosphorus removal); 30 agglomerations are listed as non‑compliant.
• Affected Cities: Plovdiv, Varna, Ruse, Haskovo, Sandanski, Velingrad, Harmanli, Lom, Berkovitsa, Elin Pelin, Yambol, Asenovgrad, Petrich, Aytos, Gotse Delchev, Karnobat, Chirpan, Parvomay, Tutrakan, Elhovo, Pleven, Pazardzhik, Dupnitsa, Razgrad, Panagyurishte, Primorsko, Albena, Kavarna, Byala Slatina, Knezha, and others.
• Legal Basis: The Commission’s request for a declaration of infringement and an order for costs under EU competition and environmental law.
• Implications: Potential financial penalties, mandatory infrastructure upgrades, stricter monitoring, and a precedent for enforcing EU wastewater standards in other member states.

Simplifying Water‑Protection Rules for Mining and Other Projects

Overview

The European Commission has issued a guidance notice to help Member States apply the Water Framework Directive (WFD) more consistently when granting permits for new projects and for existing activities, with a particular focus on the mining sector. The notice aims to reduce uncertainty around environmental assessments, streamline permitting, and support the EU’s broader goals of water resilience, critical raw‑material security, and a sustainable energy transition.

The guidance clarifies how to interpret key WFD provisions, the Groundwater Directive, and the Environmental Quality Standards Directive, especially after the 2026 amendments. It explains how to assess chemical status, identify river‑basin‑specific pollutants, and use natural background concentrations and bioavailability when setting or applying quality standards. It also details practical tools such as mixing zones, new exemptions for short‑term impacts and relocation of pollution, and flexibility for renewing or extending permits.

Importantly, the notice does not replace existing EU law; it merely offers a harmonised interpretation to aid Member States, industry, and stakeholders in meeting legal obligations while encouraging efficient, environmentally sound development.

Key Elements

• Harmonised Interpretation

  • Clarifies how to assess chemical status under the WFD, Groundwater Directive, and EQSD.
    
  • Emphasises that compliance is evaluated at the water‑body level, not at individual installations.
    

• River‑Basin‑Specific Pollutants (RBSPs)

  • Defines criteria for designating RBSPs and setting national EQS.
    
  • Provides timelines for compliance and possible time‑related exemptions.
    

• Natural Background & Bioavailability

  • Encourages consideration of natural metal concentrations and bioavailability when setting or assessing EQS.
    
  • Helps avoid overly strict standards that do not reflect ecological reality.
    

• Mixing Zones

  • Allows Member States to designate zones near discharge points where temporary exceedances of EQS are accepted, provided overall water‑body status is maintained.
    
  • Supports permitting of projects that cannot meet EQS at the point of discharge.
    

• Permitting Requirements

  • Outlines the WFD’s non‑deterioration principle and the conditions under which a project may be authorised.
    
  • Recommends a screening approach to filter projects unlikely to affect water‑body status.
    

• Flexibilities for Sustainable Development

  • Article 4(7) exemptions for projects of overriding public interest, with mitigation measures and no better alternatives.
    
  • New exemptions (Article 4(7a) and 4(7b)) for short‑term impacts (≤ 1 yr chemical, ≤ 3 yrs ecological) and for relocation of pollution without net increase in load.
    

• Renewal & Extension of Existing Permits

  • Time‑related exemptions (Article 4(4)) and lower‑objective exemptions (Article 4(5)) can be applied beyond 2027 if justified by natural conditions or disproportionate costs.
    
  • Emphasises periodic review under Article 11 and the need to update permits with new technologies to avoid deterioration.
    

• Alignment with Other EU Policies

  • Supports the Critical Raw Materials Act, Renewable Energy Directive III, Chips Act, and Net‑Zero Industry Act by providing a clearer permitting pathway for related projects.
    

• Implementation Support

  • Links to Common Implementation Strategy guidance, structured monitoring, and technical tools for mixing‑zone identification and EQS derivation.
    

These provisions collectively aim to make water‑policy compliance more predictable, reduce administrative burdens, and enable the EU to meet its water‑resilience and resource‑security targets.

Malta Locks Down Key Offshore Zones, Pausing Hydrocarbon Licensing

Overview

The European Union’s Directive 94/22/EC sets out the legal framework for granting and using authorisations for the prospection, exploration and production of hydrocarbons on the continental shelf. It aims to ensure that such activities are carried out safely, sustainably and in a manner that protects marine and environmental interests.

On 25 March 2026, the Maltese government issued a formal notice under this directive, declaring that four specific offshore areas—Areas 1, 4, 5 and 7—are now under an existing authorisation. Consequently, these zones are temporarily closed to new licensing applications until the Maltese authorities provide further guidance.

The notice serves as a clear signal to energy companies, investors and research institutions that any plans to explore or develop hydrocarbons in these areas must be paused. Stakeholders are encouraged to contact the Continental Shelf Department for detailed information and to stay informed about potential future openings.

Key Elements

• Directive Basis: Directive 94/22/EC governs hydrocarbon authorisations on the continental shelf.
  
• Authorized Areas: Malta has placed Areas 1, 4, 5 and 7 under an existing authorisation.
  
• Licensing Pause: These areas are not available for new licensing until further notice.
  
• Official Publication: Notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 25 March 2026 (C/2026/1943).
  
• Contact Information: Director General, Continental Shelf Department, Ministry for Finance, Floriana, Malta – email: dgcs.csmalta@gov.mt; website: continentalshelf.gov.mt.
  
• Current Status: The notice is active and in force.

2027 Energy & Water Funding Bill: $30 B+ for Infrastructure, Climate Resilience, and Clean Energy

Overview

The Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2027 (H.R. 9022) authorizes more than $30 billion in federal funding for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2027. The bill is designed to strengthen the nation’s water‑and‑energy infrastructure, support climate‑resilient projects, and accelerate the transition to cleaner, more secure energy systems. Key agencies receiving funds include the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Bureau of Reclamation, and the Department of Energy (DOE), along with several independent agencies that manage regional water and energy resources.

The legislation balances large capital investments—such as new flood‑control levees, dam rehabilitation, and renewable‑energy research—with robust oversight provisions. It imposes strict reprogramming limits, requires work‑plan approvals, and mandates quarterly reporting to Congress, ensuring that appropriated money is spent on authorized projects and not diverted to new or unapproved initiatives.

Key Elements

• Corps of Engineers

  • $2.382 B for construction of flood‑control, shore‑protection, and ecosystem‑restoration projects.
    
  • $6.255 B for operation, maintenance, and security of existing waterways and harbors.
    
  • $175 M for investigations, surveys, and detailed studies.
    
  • $470 M for Mississippi River flood‑damage reduction, with $6.55 M from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund.
    
  • $223 M for regulatory program administration and $40 M for flood‑control emergency response.
    
  • Reprogramming rules limit changes to projects and require congressional notification for significant shifts.

• Bureau of Reclamation

  • $1.675 B for water‑resource development, restoration, and facility operations across the western United States.
    
  • Dedicated transfers to the Upper and Lower Colorado River Basin Funds and the San Gabriel Basin Restoration Fund.
    
  • $23 M for the Central Utah Project Completion Act and $32 M for California Bay‑Delta restoration.

• Department of Energy

  • $1.85 B for critical‑minerals and energy‑innovation projects, including advanced battery and semiconductor research.
    
  • $190 M for cybersecurity, energy‑security, and emergency‑response infrastructure.
    
  • $235 M for electricity research and development, and $1.8 B for nuclear‑energy programs.
    
  • $700 M for hydrocarbons and geothermal‑energy R&D, with a focus on low‑emission extraction methods.
    
  • $300 M for the Advanced Research Projects Agency‑Energy (ARPA‑E) and $100 M for small modular reactor deployment.
    
  • DOE is restricted from initiating new programs without prior congressional approval and must report all grant and contract awards over $1 M.

• Independent Agencies & Regional Commissions

  • $200 M for the Appalachian Regional Commission, $32 M for the Delta Regional Authority, and $18 M for the Denali Commission.
    
  • Funding for the Great Lakes Authority, Northern Border Regional Commission, and others to support regional water‑resource management.

• General Provisions

  • No funds may be used to influence congressional action or to create new programs without explicit approval.
    
  • Reprogramming of more than 10 % of a program’s budget requires a 30‑day notice to the Appropriations Committees.
    
  • All agencies must submit quarterly reports detailing expenditures, reprogramming, and compliance with statutory limits.
    
  • Specific restrictions on nuclear‑facility construction, strategic petroleum reserve sales, and foreign‑entity procurement are included to safeguard national security and environmental integrity.

This bill represents a comprehensive investment in the nation’s water and energy infrastructure, aiming to enhance resilience to climate impacts while advancing clean‑energy innovation and resource stewardship.

Ukraine Support Act: A Broad Push to Counter Russian Aggression and Secure Energy and Resource Stability

Overview
The Ukraine Support Act (H.R. 2913) is a comprehensive U.S. legislative package aimed at bolstering Ukraine’s sovereignty, strengthening NATO, and countering Russian influence across multiple domains. It authorizes a wide range of diplomatic, economic, and military measures—including sanctions, export controls, and direct financial assistance—while establishing new mechanisms for war‑risk insurance, reconstruction funding, and nuclear energy cooperation. The bill also creates a special coordinator for Ukrainian reconstruction and expands support for media freedom and counter‑disinformation efforts.

The Act places a particular emphasis on the energy and natural‑resource sectors. It imposes targeted sanctions on Russian oil, mining, and nuclear industries, and it authorizes a $30 million annual allocation (2025‑2029) for U.S.–European nuclear cooperation to reduce Russian influence in the region’s energy infrastructure. Vessel war‑risk insurance provisions and the Insurance for Ukraine Initiative are designed to protect maritime trade and grain exports, ensuring that Ukraine’s agricultural and energy exports remain secure amid conflict. A dedicated Ukraine Reconstruction Trust Fund and a special coordinator are intended to mobilize private capital and coordinate federal agencies for post‑war rebuilding.

Beyond energy, the bill strengthens security assistance through expanded lend‑lease authority, direct loans, and support for Baltic allies. It also establishes a robust reporting framework for intelligence cooperation, military contributions, and sanctions compliance, ensuring congressional oversight and accountability. The legislation reflects a holistic strategy that combines military aid, economic pressure, and reconstruction planning to safeguard Ukraine’s territorial integrity and promote long‑term stability in the region.

Key Elements

• Sanctions and Export Controls

  • Targeted sanctions on Russian financial institutions, oil and mining companies, Rosatom, and entities involved in the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant.
    
  • Price‑cap vessel sanctions and SWIFT restrictions to curb Russian oil trade.
    
  • Dual‑use export controls to prevent transfer of critical technologies to Russia and North Korea.
    
  • 500 % ad‑valorem duties on Russian goods and a 100 % tax on Russian sovereign asset gains.

• Energy and Nuclear Cooperation

  • $30 million annual funding (2025‑2029) for U.S.–European nuclear energy collaboration, focusing on small modular reactors and non‑proliferation safeguards.
    
  • Strategy to counter Russian influence in European nuclear supply chains and to support Ukraine’s nuclear safety and operational control.
    
  • Sanctions on Rosatom and related entities, with limited waivers for medical isotope production.

• Maritime and Agricultural Security

  • Vessel war‑risk insurance eligibility for U.S., NATO, and Ukrainian‑owned vessels transporting cargo to/from Ukraine.
    
  • Insurance for Ukraine Initiative to promote war‑risk insurance and secure grain export routes.
    
  • Support for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and counter‑disinformation programs to protect information flows.

• Reconstruction and Economic Recovery

  • Ukraine Reconstruction Trust Fund funded by tax revenues from Russian sovereign assets.
    
  • Special Coordinator for Ukrainian Reconstruction to align federal agencies and private capital for rebuilding infrastructure, energy grids, and industrial capacity.
    
  • Authorization of $250 million for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (FY 2026) and new bureaus to expand reach in Eurasia.

• Security Assistance and Military Aid

  • Expanded lend‑lease authority and direct loans up to $8 billion for Ukraine and NATO allies.
    
  • Support for Baltic countries’ defense capabilities and joint exercises.
    
  • Regular reporting on allied military contributions, intelligence cooperation, and U.S. arms transfers.

• Oversight and Reporting

  • Mandatory reports every 90–120 days to congressional committees on sanctions, intelligence, military aid, and reconstruction progress.
    
  • Congressional review requirements for any changes to sanctions or export controls, ensuring transparency and accountability.

This legislation represents a multi‑layered approach to safeguarding Ukraine’s sovereignty, securing critical energy and natural‑resource sectors, and fostering long‑term resilience in the face of Russian aggression.

U.S. Flags Turkish Chromium Trioxide as Potential Dumping Threat

Overview
Chromium trioxide (CrO₃), a highly reactive inorganic compound used in metal finishing, pigments, and industrial cleaning, is imported into the United States in both dry and solution forms. The Department of Commerce’s International Trade Administration has issued a preliminary affirmative determination that chromium trioxide from the Republic of Türkiye is being sold in the U.S. at less than fair value (LTFV) for the period July 1 2024 – June 30 2025. The investigation was initiated on January 5 2026, and the preliminary decision relies on facts available with adverse inferences because the sole respondent, Şişecam, failed to provide required data.

The preliminary determination assigns an estimated weighted‑average dumping margin of $40.88 per metric ton for Şişecam and the same rate for all other exporters and producers not individually examined. Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to suspend liquidation of affected shipments and require a cash deposit equal to the applicable margin until further notice. No verification will be conducted due to the respondent’s non‑cooperation. Interested parties may submit case briefs or rebuttals within 14 days of publication, and the final determination is expected within 75 days, after which the U.S. International Trade Commission will assess potential injury to U.S. industry.

Key Elements
- Product scope: Chromium trioxide (CAS 1333‑82‑0) in any form, including blends containing ≥90 % CrO₃.
- Period of investigation: July 1 2024 – June 30 2025.
- Preliminary dumping margin: $40.88 per metric ton for Şişecam; same rate applied to all other exporters (“all‑others” rate).
- Suspension of liquidation: CBP must halt entry clearance of affected shipments and require a cash deposit equal to the margin.
- No verification: Investigation proceeds without on‑site verification due to the respondent’s failure to cooperate.
- Public comment window: 14‑day period for case briefs; rebuttal briefs allowed 5 days after case briefs.
- Final determination timeline: Within 75 days of the preliminary notice; ITC will then evaluate material injury.
- Implications for U.S. industry: Potential protection of domestic chromium‑based manufacturing and chemical processing sectors from undervalued imports.

“Keeping the Coast in the Loop: NOAA’s Request to Streamline RCOS Data Collection”

Overview

The U.S. Department of Commerce, through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), has submitted a request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to renew an existing information‑collection program for the Regional Coastal Observing Systems (RCOS). The request is part of the Paperwork Reduction Act’s requirement to keep federal data‑collection burdens reasonable while ensuring that the RCOS network continues to provide high‑quality ocean and coastal observations.

RCOS are regional partners that gather, manage, and share data on ocean conditions, weather, and coastal hazards. They feed this information into the national Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS), a partnership that supports navigation safety, fisheries management, climate research, and emergency response. The renewal request does not change the data collected; it simply updates the program name and confirms that the burden estimate remains at 75 hours of effort per respondent, with an anticipated 300 participants.

The notice invites the public, businesses, non‑profits, state, local, tribal, and federal agencies to comment on the collection for an additional 30 days. Feedback will help NOAA refine the process and reduce unnecessary paperwork while maintaining the integrity of the coastal observing network.

Key Elements

• Program Purpose: Certify and integrate Regional Coastal Observing Systems into the national IOOS to improve safety, economic resilience, and environmental protection.
  
• Information Collection: Voluntary application data required for RCOS certification, including governance, data management, and observation protocols.
  
• Burden Estimate: 75 hours of effort per respondent, with an expected 300 respondents, unchanged from the original collection.
  
• Scope: Applies to business and for‑profit entities, non‑profits, state/local/tribal governments, and federal agencies that operate or support coastal observing networks.
  
• Frequency: Certification applications are voluntary with no deadline; the information‑collection request is reviewed every five years.
  
• Legal Basis: ICOOS Act of 2009 and the Coordinated Ocean Observations and Research Act of 2020, codified in 33 U.S.C. 3601‑3610 and 15 CFR 997.1‑997.26.
  
• Public Comment Window: 30 days following publication (May 22, 2026) to submit written comments via the OMB website.
  
• Outcome: Successful renewal will allow RCOS to continue contributing critical coastal data to national decision‑making while keeping reporting burdens minimal.

India’s Chromium Trioxide Faces U.S. Trade Scrutiny: Preliminary Dumping Determination and Extended Provisional Measures

Overview
The U.S. Department of Commerce has issued a preliminary affirmative determination that chromium trioxide imported from India is being sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV). The investigation covers the period July 1 2024 through June 30 2025 and focuses on the inorganic compound CrO₃, widely used in metal finishing, pigment production, and other industrial applications.

The preliminary decision assigns an estimated dumping margin of 14.44 % to the sole mandatory respondent, Vishnu Chemicals, and applies the same margin as an all‑others rate for other exporters and producers. As a result, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) will suspend liquidation of affected shipments and require cash deposits equal to the estimated dumping margin (or the all‑others rate) until the final determination is issued.

Because Vishnu Chemicals requested a postponement of the final determination and an extension of provisional measures, the Department will delay the final ruling for up to 135 days and extend the provisional measures from the usual four months to a maximum of six months. The U.S. International Trade Commission will be notified and may assess whether imports of chromium trioxide are materially injuring U.S. industry.

Key Elements
- Preliminary affirmative determination of sales at less than fair value for chromium trioxide from India.
- Estimated dumping margin: 14.44 % for Vishnu Chemicals; same rate applied to all other exporters and producers.
- Suspension of liquidation: CBP will halt entry clearance of the subject merchandise pending final determination.
- Cash deposit requirement: Importers must deposit a cash amount equal to the estimated dumping margin (or all‑others rate) before goods can be released.
- Extension of provisional measures: Provisional duties and cash deposits will remain in effect for up to six months, instead of the standard four.
- Postponement of final determination: Final ruling will be delayed up to 135 days after publication of the preliminary notice.
- ITC notification: The U.S. International Trade Commission will be informed and may evaluate material injury to U.S. industry.
- Scope of product: All forms of chromium trioxide (dry or solution) and blends containing ≥90 % chromium trioxide are covered, regardless of purity or physical form.
- Industry impact: The decision could affect manufacturers of pigments, metal finishes, and other processes that rely on chromium trioxide, potentially raising costs and altering supply chains.

U.S. Imposes Countervailing Duties on Russian Palladium to Counter Subsidies

Overview

The U.S. Department of Commerce has concluded that Russian producers and exporters of unwrought palladium are receiving countervailable subsidies, prompting the imposition of countervailing duties. The investigation covered the 2024 calendar year and identified that the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation and Russian mining firms were providing financial contributions that give a specific benefit to palladium producers.

The final determination assigns an estimated countervailable subsidy rate of 109.10 % to two Russian entities—JSC Urals Innovative Technologies and Prioksky Plant of Non‑Ferrous Metals—and applies the same rate to all other producers and exporters not individually examined. This rate will be used to calculate duties on imports of Russian palladium pending an injury determination by the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC).

If the ITC finds that U.S. domestic industry is materially injured or threatened by Russian palladium imports, the Commerce Department will issue a countervailing duty order and require U.S. Customs and Border Protection to collect cash deposits on affected shipments. Should the ITC determine no material injury, the suspended liquidation will be lifted and any deposits refunded.

Key Elements

• Scope: All unwrought palladium in any primary form (ingots, blocks, pellets, etc.), regardless of production method, including recycled or blended material.
  
• Subsidy Rate: 109.10 % countervailable subsidy rate applied to identified Russian producers and to all other exporters not individually examined.
  
• Suspension of Liquidation: CBP is instructed to collect cash deposits and suspend liquidation of Russian palladium entries from March 11, 2026, pending ITC injury determination.
  
• ITC Notification: Commerce will notify the ITC of the affirmative determination; the ITC has 45 days to decide on material injury.
  
• Administrative Protective Order: Proprietary information disclosed in the investigation is protected; parties must return or destroy such material if the ITC issues a negative injury determination.
  
• Implications for Geoscience and Mineral Resources: The decision underscores the U.S. commitment to enforcing trade rules that protect domestic mining and refining sectors from subsidized foreign competition, potentially affecting global palladium supply chains and pricing.

EPA Releases Comments on Federal Environmental Impact Statements: A Window into Oil, Gas, and Nuclear Facility Planning

Overview

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has published a Notice of Availability (NOA) announcing that its comment letters on several federal Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) are now publicly accessible. This action fulfills the EPA’s obligation under Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act to disclose its evaluations of EISs prepared by other federal agencies, thereby promoting transparency and informed public participation in environmental decision‑making.

The NOA lists four specific EISs that received EPA comments in May 2026: two related to oil and gas leasing and development in California’s Bakersfield and Central Coast regions, one concerning enhanced plutonium facility utilization at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and another addressing Willamette Valley system operations and maintenance. Each comment letter is linked to a contact person and phone number for further inquiries, ensuring stakeholders can easily access detailed EPA analyses and recommendations.

By making these comment letters available, the EPA provides a critical resource for geoscientists, energy and mineral resource professionals, and environmental advocates. The comments offer insight into how federal agencies weigh environmental, health, and economic factors in projects that shape land use, resource extraction, and national security infrastructure.

Key Elements

• Transparency Requirement: EPA’s disclosure satisfies Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act, mandating public release of agency comments on other federal EISs.
  
• CEQ Guidance Compliance: The notice follows the Council on Environmental Quality’s guidance on 42 U.S.C. 4332, ensuring consistent federal environmental review practices.
  
• EISs Covered:
  
  • Bakersfield Field Office – Oil and Gas Leasing and Development (06/22/2026) – Contact: John Hodge, 661‑391‑6145.
    
  • Central Coast Field Office – Oil and Gas Leasing and Development (06/22/2026) – Contact: Zachary Ormsby, 661‑391‑6145.
    
  • Enhanced Plutonium Facility Utilization – Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (06/22/2026) – Contact: Alan Chen, 833‑778‑0508.
    
  • Willamette Valley System Operations and Maintenance (06/22/2026) – Contact: Liz Oliver, 503‑808‑4712.
    
• Availability Window: EPA comment letters were filed on May 11, 2026, and remain accessible through May 18, 2026.
  
• Stakeholder Access: The notice provides phone numbers and a general information line (202‑993‑3272) for inquiries, facilitating engagement from industry, academia, and the public.
  
• Implications for Resource Management: The comments influence decisions on oil and gas leasing, nuclear facility operations, and regional infrastructure, affecting land use, environmental protection, and energy policy.

Fort Smith Sewer Overhaul Gets 23‑Year Extension: Clean Water Act Consent Decree Modified

Overview

In May 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a proposed modification to a Clean Water Act consent decree that originally required the City of Fort Smith, Arkansas, to repair its sanitary sewer system and prevent illegal sewage discharges. The original decree, issued in 2015, set a 12‑year rehabilitation schedule ending in January 2027. The new modification extends the overall term to 23.5 years, pushing the final deadline to June 2038, and revises interim milestones to give the city greater flexibility in prioritizing projects.

The amendment also imposes new funding safeguards, requiring the city to secure adequate financial resources through specified measures before proceeding with each phase of the rehabilitation. By extending the timeline and tightening funding provisions, the modification aims to balance the need for timely infrastructure improvements with the practical constraints of municipal budgeting.

Public comment on the proposed changes is open for 30 days, with submissions directed to the DOJ’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. The notice invites stakeholders—including residents, environmental groups, and industry representatives—to weigh in on how the extended schedule and funding requirements will affect water quality, public health, and local economic development.

Key Elements

• Extended Term: Consent decree term increased from 12 to 23.5 years (June 2038).
  
• Revised Milestones: Interim deadlines adjusted to allow the city to prioritize projects based on urgency and resource availability.
  
• Funding Requirements: City must demonstrate adequate financing through specific measures before each rehabilitation phase.
  
• Public Comment Period: 30‑day window for written or electronic comments, with submissions to the DOJ’s ENRD.
  
• Enforcement Context: Modification filed in the Western District of Arkansas under Civil Action No. 2:14‑cv‑002266‑PKH.
  
• Implications for Water Quality: Aims to reduce untreated sewage discharges, improving downstream water bodies and protecting aquatic ecosystems.
  
• Infrastructure Impact: Provides a more realistic timeline for upgrading aging sewer infrastructure, potentially reducing future emergency repairs.
  
• Stakeholder Engagement: Encourages input from local communities, environmental NGOs, and businesses affected by sewer operations.

FAA Moves to Modernize Weather Reporting for Safer Skies

Overview

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to update its weather reporting regulations. The proposal replaces weather reports issued by the National Weather Service (NWS) with reports prepared by the FAA or other sources approved by the Administrator. This change reflects the fact that the NWS no longer provides the specific type of weather reports referenced in current FAA regulations.

The primary goal is to keep the National Airspace System (NAS) fully informed about weather conditions while removing outdated regulatory language. By allowing the FAA to issue or approve alternative weather reports, the agency aims to streamline data flow, reduce administrative burden, and ensure that pilots and airlines receive timely, accurate weather information.

Stakeholders—including pilots, airlines, weather service providers, and geoscience professionals—are invited to submit comments by June 22, 2026. The proposed rule will amend 14 CFR Parts 1, 91, 121, and 135, and will be available for public review through the DOT docket system.

Key Elements

• Substitution of NWS reports: FAA will issue or approve weather reports that replace the NWS reports previously required in the regulations.
  
• Removal of outdated references: The rule eliminates references to the NWS that are no longer applicable, simplifying the regulatory text.
  
• Maintaining weather awareness: The FAA emphasizes that the change will not compromise, and may improve, the quality and timeliness of weather information available to NAS users.
  
• Regulatory scope: Amendments will affect 14 CFR Parts 1, 91, 121, and 135, covering general aviation, commercial air transport, and air carrier operations.
  
• Comment period: Public comments are due by June 22, 2026; submissions can be made electronically or via mail/fax to the DOT Docket Operations.
  
• Docket information: Docket number FAA‑2026‑5479; docket access and contact details provided in the NPRM.
  
• Implications for geoscience data: The shift may influence how atmospheric data are collected, validated, and disseminated to aviation stakeholders, potentially affecting research and operational forecasting workflows.

BEACH Act 2025: Boosting Coastal Water Quality Monitoring and Source Identification

Overview

The BEACH Act of 2025 revises the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to strengthen monitoring of coastal recreation waters, including beaches and nearby shallow upstream areas. It expands grant programs for states and local governments, allowing them to identify specific contamination sources that affect public beach use. The bill updates funding levels, setting $30 million annually for fiscal years 2025‑2029, and revises guidance to incorporate modern testing technologies.

The Act’s primary goal is to improve public health and environmental stewardship along U.S. coastlines. By broadening the definition of monitored waters and mandating source‑identification efforts, the legislation aims to pinpoint pollution contributors—such as stormwater runoff, sewage discharges, or industrial effluents—so that targeted remediation can be implemented. The updated guidance from the EPA will help agencies adopt innovative analytical methods, ensuring more accurate and timely data.

Overall, the BEACH Act seeks to protect recreational water quality, support local and state environmental agencies, and foster a science‑based approach to coastal pollution management.

Key Elements

• Expanded Grant Scope: Grants now cover “coastal recreation waters, including nearby shallow upstream waters, adjacent to or present on beaches or similar access points.”
  
• Source Identification Requirement: States and local governments receiving grants must use funds to identify specific contamination sources affecting monitored waters.
  
• Updated Funding: Annual appropriations set at $30 million for fiscal years 2025‑2029 (replacing the 2001‑2005 allocation).
  
• EPA Guidance on Testing: The Administrator must issue guidance that reflects innovations in water contamination testing technologies.
  
• Legislative Amendments: Modifications to Section 406 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act clarify grant eligibility, reporting, and data requirements.
  
• Focus on Public Health: By identifying pollution sources, the Act supports interventions that reduce health risks for beachgoers and preserve marine ecosystems.

GEO Act: Fast‑Tracking Geothermal Permits Amid Legal Uncertainty

Overview

The Geothermal Energy Opportunity Act (GEO Act) amends the 1970 Geothermal Steam Act to impose a 60‑day deadline for the U.S. Secretary of the Interior to approve or deny geothermal leasing applications, even when civil litigation is pending. The bill aims to reduce uncertainty for developers and accelerate the deployment of geothermal energy projects across the United States.

The act requires the Secretary to complete all federal review obligations—including the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, and relevant portions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act—within the 60‑day window. If a federal court has not vacated or granted injunctive relief, the Secretary must proceed with the application regardless of ongoing litigation. This provision is intended to prevent legal disputes from stalling project development and to provide clearer timelines for stakeholders.

While the GEO Act does not alter the authority of federal courts to issue injunctions or vacate leases, it clarifies that such court actions do not automatically halt the processing of applications. The bill also defines “authorization” broadly to include any federal license, permit, or administrative decision necessary for geothermal projects, ensuring that the 60‑day deadline applies to all relevant approvals.

Key Elements

• 60‑Day Processing Deadline: The Secretary must approve or deny geothermal leasing applications within 60 days of completing all required federal reviews, regardless of pending civil actions.
  
• Uninterrupted Processing: Pending civil litigation does not automatically pause the application review unless a federal court explicitly vacates or provides injunctive relief.
  
• No New Court Authority: The act does not expand or modify the existing powers of federal courts to vacate or restrain geothermal leases or permits.
  
• Broad Definition of Authorization: “Authorization” includes any federal license, permit, approval, or interagency decision required for the siting, construction, or operation of geothermal projects.
  
• Compliance with Environmental Laws: All reviews must satisfy the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, and applicable sections of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act before the 60‑day deadline.
  
• Industry Impact: The provision is designed to reduce legal uncertainty, shorten project timelines, and encourage investment in geothermal energy development.

Geothermal Cost‑Recovery Act: Giving the Interior Department a New Billing Power

The Geothermal Cost‑Recovery Authority Act of 2025 amends the 1970 Geothermal Steam Act to grant the U.S. Department of the Interior the authority to collect fees from applicants and holders of geothermal leases. From the date of enactment through September 30, 2032, the Secretary may require reimbursement for the administrative costs of processing lease applications, permits, and related approvals, as well as for inspections and monitoring of exploration, drilling, and facility operations. The bill allows the Secretary to adjust the amount based on cost‑share agreements, economic hardship, or the need to promote broader geothermal use, and directs the recovered funds to offset the Interior’s appropriation for these activities.

The Act also establishes a five‑year reporting requirement. The Secretary must, in consultation with industry and stakeholders, submit a comprehensive assessment of how the new cost‑recovery provisions affect the Bureau of Land Management’s geothermal program, recommend whether the authority should be reauthorized, and suggest further updates. The report will be made public and presented to both the House Natural Resources Committee and the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

Key Elements

• Cost‑Recovery Authority: The Secretary can charge lease applicants and holders for administrative and inspection costs related to geothermal leasing and operations.
  
• Timeframe: The authority applies from enactment until September 30, 2032.
  
• Considerations: Reimbursement decisions may factor in existing cost‑share agreements, economic hardship, and the goal of maximizing geothermal resource use.
  
• Adjustments: The Secretary may reduce fees if full reimbursement would impose hardship or if a lower amount better promotes resource utilization.
  
• Use of Funds: Recovered amounts are credited to the Interior’s appropriation for lease processing, permitting, and monitoring activities.
  
• Reporting Requirement: A five‑year report must evaluate the impact on the BLM’s geothermal program, recommend reauthorization, and propose program updates, with input from industry and stakeholders.
  
• Transparency: The report will be publicly available on the Interior Department’s website and submitted to congressional committees.

STEAM Act: Accelerating Geothermal Energy Development

The Streamlining Thermal Energy through Advanced Mechanisms Act (STEAM Act) seeks to fast‑track geothermal exploration and development in areas that have already been studied or partially developed. By amending the Energy Policy Act of 2005, the bill removes procedural hurdles that have historically slowed geothermal projects, particularly those related to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review process. The legislation is currently on the Union Calendar (No. 570) and has been referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources for further consideration.

Key objectives of the STEAM Act include:
- Expedited NEPA Review: The Act revises Section 390 of the Energy Policy Act to explicitly include geothermal resources in the environmental assessment framework, replacing generic “gas” references with “geothermal.”
- Streamlined Permitting: By clarifying that geothermal projects in previously studied or developed areas can bypass certain redundant review steps, the bill aims to reduce lead times for permitting and licensing.
- Encouragement of Existing Sites: Focus on areas with prior data or infrastructure lowers technical risk and encourages investment in geothermal projects that can quickly contribute to the energy mix.
- Legislative Clarity: The amendment removes ambiguous language (“or gas”) that has historically caused confusion in the application of NEPA to geothermal projects.
- Potential for Increased Capacity: Faster development timelines could accelerate the deployment of geothermal power, enhancing renewable energy supply and reducing reliance on fossil fuels.

These provisions collectively aim to make geothermal energy a more viable and attractive option for developers, policymakers, and communities seeking clean, reliable power.

Streamlining Interior Appeals: New Rules Clarify How Natural‑Resource Decisions Are Challenged

Overview

The U.S. Department of the Interior’s Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) has adopted a final rule that solidifies the procedures it uses to hear and decide appeals of agency decisions. The rule incorporates an earlier interim final rule, corrects typographical errors, and incorporates public comments to clarify how parties can file appeals, request stays, and manage electronic submissions. By making the rule effective immediately, OHA reduces the period during which the interim version could cause confusion about the governing procedures.

For stakeholders in land‑use, grazing, mining, pipeline, and other natural‑resource projects, the rule provides clearer guidance on the timing and content of appeals, the criteria for obtaining a stay of a decision, and the responsibilities of parties to serve notices and documents. It also codifies the agency’s authority to manage cases efficiently, including the use of electronic filing and the removal of outdated sanctions provisions.

The rule is largely procedural and does not impose new economic burdens on small entities, nor does it trigger environmental or energy‑impact assessments. Its primary purpose is to streamline the administrative process, enhance transparency, and ensure that appeals are handled consistently and fairly across the Interior’s diverse portfolio of natural‑resource decisions.

Key Elements

• Adoption of the Interim Final Rule (IFR) – The final rule incorporates the IFR issued in January 2025, with minor changes to address comments and correct errors.
  
• Immediate Effectiveness – The rule becomes effective on May 21 2026, eliminating the interim period and reducing uncertainty for parties.
  
• Clarified Stay‑Petition Criteria – The rule restores the four‑factor test for stays (immediate irreparable harm, balance of harms, likelihood of success, and public interest) and requires that stays be filed concurrently with a notice of appeal.
  
• Electronic Filing and Service – Parties may file documents electronically, and the rule clarifies how service to all named parties must be completed, including the use of BLM’s electronic platforms.
  
• Case‑Management Provisions – New language codifies the ALJ’s authority to manage proceedings, set deadlines, and ensure fair and efficient resolution of cases.
  
• Removal of Outdated Sanctions – The rule eliminates specific sanctions provisions that were no longer needed, replacing them with general case‑management authority.
  
• Grazing‑Specific Updates – BLM is required to provide the entire grazing‑decision record to all parties within 45 days of an appeal, expediting access to the record for potential judicial review.
  
• No Significant Economic or Environmental Impact – The rule is not a significant energy action, does not impose unfunded mandates, and is categorically excluded from NEPA review.
  
• Public Participation and Transparency – The rule invites comments on information‑collection requirements and emphasizes clear, plain‑language communication.
  

These provisions collectively make the Interior’s appeal process more predictable and accessible for geoscientists, energy developers, and other stakeholders involved in natural‑resource management.

Kentucky Tightens Surface Mining Rules: State Program Updated and Interim Regulations Repealed

Overview

The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) has approved a comprehensive amendment to Kentucky’s Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) regulatory program. The change, effective June 22 2026, removes the state’s interim mining regulations, updates editorial language, and eliminates the two‑acre exemption that once allowed very small coal operations. These revisions bring Kentucky’s rules fully in line with the permanent SMCRA framework and clarify responsibilities for operators, engineers, and regulators.

The amendment tightens several key areas of surface‑mining oversight. It requires that all existing structures meet the performance standards set in Kentucky’s permanent program, removes discretionary reporting for coal‑waste disposal sites, and adds more frequent inspections and maintenance requirements for impoundments. Post‑mining land‑use and prime‑farmland provisions are also clarified to reflect the repeal of interim rules, ensuring that reclaimed land must meet the state’s current reclamation standards.

No public comments were received, and the Environmental Protection Agency did not need to concur because the changes do not affect air or water quality standards. The rule is not considered a major economic or environmental action, and it imposes no unfunded mandates on state, local, or tribal governments.

Key Elements

• Repeal of Interim Regulations – Kentucky’s 2018 interim rules are fully removed, leaving only the permanent SMCRA‑aligned program.
  
• Elimination of Two‑Acre Exemption – The 405 KAR 26:001 provision allowing operations on ≤2 acres is repealed, closing a loophole for very small coal projects.
  
• Stricter Existing‑Structure Requirements – All existing mining structures must now meet the performance standards of Kentucky’s permanent program (Chapters 16‑20) rather than interim standards.
  
• Coal‑Waste Disposal Oversight – Operators must submit additional stability analyses if a waste site could threaten life, property, or the environment; discretionary reporting is removed.
  
• Enhanced Impoundment Management – Quarterly inspections are required, with the option for more frequent checks if structural weakness is evident; maintenance duties (vegetation control, spillway cleaning) are explicitly mandated.
  
• Post‑Mining Land‑Use Clarity – Land must be reclaimed in compliance with the permanent program; references to interim compliance are eliminated.
  
• Prime Farmland and Land‑Use References – Citations to interim permits are replaced with federal initial‑program references, ensuring consistency with SMCRA.
  
• No EPA Concurrence Needed – The amendment does not alter air or water quality standards, so EPA concurrence was not required.
  
• Effective Date – The rule takes effect 30 days after publication, on June 22 2026.
  
• No Significant Economic Impact – The amendment is exempt from major rule review and does not impose unfunded mandates or significant costs on small entities.

BLM Corrects Oil & Gas Royalty Rule to Align with New Energy Act

Overview

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has issued a correction to a direct‑final rule published on April 29, 2026. The amendment updates the regulations governing royalty on oil and gas production to reflect provisions of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which was enacted on July 4, 2025. The primary change is a typographical fix to the section heading in 43 CFR Part 3100, ensuring the rule’s language accurately reflects the intended statutory requirements.

The correction is effective June 29, 2026, unless significant adverse comments are received by May 29, 2026. If such comments arise, the BLM will either withdraw the rule and this correction or issue a new final rule that addresses the concerns. The update does not alter the substantive royalty framework; it simply clarifies the rule’s text to maintain consistency with the new legislation.

For stakeholders, the amendment confirms that BLM’s royalty regulations remain in compliance with the latest federal energy policy while preserving the existing framework for oil and gas leasing, fees, rentals, and royalties on public lands.

Key Elements

• Typographical correction: Section heading updated to “§ 3103.31 Royalty on production.”
  
• Effective date: June 29, 2026, unless adverse comments are received.
  
• Comment period: May 29, 2026 (30 days after publication).
  
• Potential actions: Withdrawal of the rule and correction, or issuance of a revised final rule if significant adverse comments are received.
  
• Regulatory context: Part of 43 CFR Part 3100, governing oil and gas leasing on federal lands.
  
• Legislative trigger: Implements changes required by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (July 4, 2025).
  
• Contact information: Peter Cowan, Senior Minerals Leasing Specialist, BLM (email/phone provided).
  
• Accessibility: Relays services available for individuals with disabilities.
  
• Minimal substantive impact: The correction does not alter royalty rates or leasing procedures—only the rule’s heading.

Sugar River Power Seeks Federal License for New Hydroelectric Project on New Hampshire’s Sugar River

Overview

Sugar River Power LLC has formally announced its intent to file a license application for the Lower Village Hydroelectric Project on the Sugar River in Sullivan County, New Hampshire. The company has been granted approval to use the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) traditional licensing process, allowing it to proceed with detailed planning and regulatory review.

The notice also reports that a Pre‑Application Document (PAD), which includes a proposed construction schedule and operational plan, was filed with FERC on March 2, 2026. In accordance with federal regulations, FERC has begun informal consultations with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and the New Hampshire State Historic Preservation Officer under the Endangered Species Act, the Magnuson‑Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, and the National Historic Preservation Act.

The project must be fully licensed by February 28, 2029, with all subsequent license applications required to be filed at least 24 months before the expiration of any existing license. The notice invites public participation, providing contact details for inquiries, comments, and interventions.

Key Elements

• Project: Lower Village Hydroelectric Project on the Sugar River, Sullivan County, NH.
  
• Licensing Process: Traditional licensing approved by FERC (Project No. 9088‑052).
  
• Pre‑Application Document: Filed March 2, 2026; available on FERC’s eLibrary (docket P‑9088).
  
• Regulatory Consultations:
  
  • U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (Section 7, Endangered Species Act).
    
  • National Marine Fisheries Service (Section 305(b), Magnuson‑Stevens Act).
    
  • New Hampshire State Historic Preservation Officer (Section 106, National Historic Preservation Act).
    
• Timeline: License application deadline February 28, 2029; 24‑month filing requirement before existing license expiration.
  
• Public Participation: Office of Public Participation contact (202‑502‑6595); online registration for updates.
  
• Contact Information:
  
  • Sugar River Power: Sam Payne, 2126 Stickney Brook Rd, Dummerston, VT 05301, (603) 903‑7663.
    
  • FERC: Debbie‑Anne A. Reese, Secretary; (202) 502‑8612.

Duke Energy Eyes 1,400‑MW Pumped‑Storage Relicensing Near Lake Jocassee—Environmental Review Set to Begin

Overview

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC has filed an application to relicense its 1,400‑megawatt Bad Creek Pumped Storage Project, a hydroelectric facility located adjacent to Lake Jocassee in Oconee County, South Carolina. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has determined that relicensing the project is unlikely to constitute a major federal action under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and has therefore issued a Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA).

The EA will be issued and circulated for a 30‑day public comment period, allowing stakeholders—including environmental groups, local residents, and industry participants—to submit feedback. All comments will be reviewed by FERC staff and considered in the final licensing decision. The process follows a schedule that may be revised as needed, with the EA’s unique NEPA identification number being EAXX‑019‑20‑000‑1774598314.

This notice signals the beginning of a formal environmental review that will assess potential impacts on water quality, wildlife habitats, and the broader human environment surrounding Lake Jocassee, while also ensuring that the project’s continued operation aligns with federal energy and environmental regulations.

Key Elements

• Project Details: 1,400‑MW Bad Creek Pumped Storage Project, located near Lake Jocassee, Oconee County, South Carolina.
  
• Relicensing Application Filed: July 14 2025 by Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC.
  
• FERC Notice of Intent: Issued February 27 2026, indicating readiness for environmental analysis.
  
• Environmental Assessment (EA): Planned to be issued, followed by a 30‑day public comment period.
  
• NEPA Identification: EAXX‑019‑20‑000‑1774598314.
  
• Public Participation: Comments, interventions, and rehearing requests accepted; contact via Office of Public Participation (202‑502‑6595).
  
• Impact Assessment: Staff does not anticipate the relicensing to be a major federal action affecting the human environment.
  
• Timeline: EA issuance and comment period scheduled; revisions to the schedule may occur.
  
• Final Decision: All EA comments will be analyzed and considered in FERC’s final licensing decision.

US Trade Commission Targets Quartz Imports with New Tariff Plan

Overview
In May 2026 the United States International Trade Commission (USITC) concluded that imports of quartz surface products—used in countertops, tiles, and other building materials—are causing serious injury to the domestic industry. The investigation, initiated after a petition from the Quartz Manufacturing Alliance of America, found that the surge in imports is a substantial cause of harm to U.S. manufacturers of similar or competing products.

The Commission’s report recommends a tariff‑rate‑quota (TRQ) to protect the domestic sector for a four‑year relief period. The TRQ would impose a 25 % tariff on in‑quota imports and a 40 % tariff on out‑of‑quota imports in the first year, with both rates decreasing by one percentage point each subsequent year. The in‑quota volume would increase annually from 140 million to 169 million square feet, allocated quarterly.

Beyond the tariff structure, the Commission advises the President to exclude imports from Canada, Mexico, and several free‑trade‑agreement partners that do not contribute significantly to the injury. It also recommends measures to prevent tariff stacking, to allocate tariff revenue to affected downstream fabricators, and to pursue international negotiations to address global overcapacity.

Key Elements

• Injury Determination – USITC found that increased quartz imports are a substantial cause of serious injury to U.S. producers of quartz surface products.
  
• Tariff‑Rate‑Quota (TRQ) Proposal –
  
  • 4‑year relief period with in‑quota tariff starting at 25 % and out‑of‑quota tariff at 40 %.
    
  • Rates decrease by 1 % each year (Year 1: 25 %/40 %; Year 4: 22 %/37 %).
    
  • In‑quota volume rises from 140 M to 169 M sq ft over four years, allocated quarterly.
    
• Country Exclusions – Imports from Canada, Mexico, and several FTA partners (Australia, Colombia, etc.) are excluded from the TRQ because they do not substantially contribute to the injury.
  
• Tariff‑Stacking Prevention – Recommendation to “de‑stack” the TRQ tariffs from other duties to avoid double‑burden on U.S. imports.
  
• Revenue Redistribution – Proposal for the President to submit a legislative plan to distribute TRQ tariff revenue to mitigate impacts on downstream quartz fabricators.
  
• Circumvention Safeguards – Suggestion of an exclusion process for cases where domestic production is lacking or critical shortages exist.
  
• International Negotiations – Encouragement to continue talks aimed at reducing global overcapacity and imbalances that drive U.S. imports.

Burley Asbestos Site: DOJ Seeks $10,000 to Cover Past Cleanup Costs, Invites Public Input

Overview

On May 18 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a proposed consent decree in the District of Idaho to recover $10,000 plus interest from Brian Tibbets, the settling defendant, for past response costs incurred by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) at the Burley Demolition Asbestos Site in Cassia County, Idaho. The decree is filed under Section 107 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), which allows the government to seek reimbursement for cleanup expenses when a responsible party is identified.

The agreement gives Tibbets “contribution protection” and covenants not to sue under CERCLA Sections 107(a) and 113, meaning he will not be held liable for future cleanup costs at the site and the EPA will not pursue legal action against him. In return, the DOJ will pay the agreed amount to the EPA, effectively closing the financial gap left by the agency’s earlier remediation efforts.

The notice opens a 30‑day public comment period, allowing residents, scientists, and stakeholders to weigh in on the proposed terms. Comments can be submitted electronically or by mail to the DOJ’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. The consent decree is available for download on the Justice Department website, and any written comments may be filed on the court docket without prior notice to the commenter.

Key Elements

• Parties Involved: U.S. Department of Justice (plaintiff) vs. Brian Tibbets (settling defendant).
  
• Site: Burley Demolition Asbestos Site, City of Burley, Cassia County, Idaho.
  
• Financial Terms: $10,000 plus interest to reimburse EPA’s past response costs.
  
• Legal Protections:
  
  • Contribution protection under CERCLA § 107(a).
    
  • Covenants not to sue under CERCLA § 113 and related statutes (42 U.S.C. 9607(a), 9613).
    
• Public Comment Period: 30 days from publication (May 21 2026 to June 20 2026).
  
• Submission Channels: Email (pubcomment‑ees.enrd@usdoj.gov) or mail (Assistant Attorney General, U.S. DOJ‑ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, D.C.).
  
• Court Reference: Civil Action No. 4:25‑cv‑7‑AKB (D. Idaho), docket number 90‑11‑3‑12616.
  
• Access to Decree: Available for download on the DOJ website; assistance available for access issues.
  
• Implications for Geoscience & Natural Resources: Demonstrates enforcement of CERCLA liability, potential precedent for asbestos remediation cost recovery, and the role of public participation in environmental litigation.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Opens Public Review on Deauthorizing Water Projects

Overview

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has issued a notice proposing a list of water‑resources development projects and separable elements that may be deauthorized under the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2020, as amended by WRDA 2024. The Corps seeks public input on which projects are no longer viable for construction, based on criteria such as lack of local support, insufficient federal or non‑federal funding, or an outdated authorizing purpose. The goal is to streamline the Corps’ portfolio, ensuring that only projects with realistic prospects for completion remain authorized.

The Corps will review comments received during a 90‑day public comment period that ends on August 19, 2026. After considering the feedback, the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works will publish a final deauthorization list and submit it to Congress for formal deauthorization. This process allows stakeholders—including geoscientists, engineers, and local communities—to influence decisions that shape water infrastructure, flood control, navigation, and environmental restoration projects across the nation.

The notice also clarifies the legal framework: projects authorized before June 10, 2014, that have not progressed to planning, design, or construction before January 4, 2025, or have not had funds obligated in the past decade, are eligible for deauthorization. Separable elements—portions of a project that can be physically isolated and produce distinct hydrologic or economic benefits—are treated separately in the list.

Key Elements

• Proposed Deauthorization List: Identifies water‑resources projects and separable elements slated for potential deauthorization.
• Eligibility Criteria: Lack of local support, insufficient funding, or obsolete authorizing purpose; no planning/design/construction before Jan 4, 2025, or no funding in the past 10 fiscal years.
• Public Comment Period: 90 days, ending August 19, 2026; comments must reference Docket ID COE‑2026‑0034.
• Submission Methods: Online portal, email (subject line with docket ID), or written mail to the Corps headquarters; hand delivery not accepted.
• Legal Basis: Section 301 of WRDA 2020, amended by WRDA 2024; Section 1301 of WRDA 2024 mandates the deauthorization process.
• Outcome: Final deauthorization list to be published and forwarded to Congress for formal deauthorization, potentially freeing resources for viable projects.
• Stakeholder Impact: Affects water‑resource planning, flood control, navigation, environmental restoration, and local community support for infrastructure projects.

EPA Extends Oil Spill Response Plan Data Collection – Your Feedback Needed

Overview

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted a renewal of its information‑collection request (ICR) for Oil Pollution Act Facility Response Plans (FRPs). The request, under OMB Control Number 2050‑0135, seeks to extend the current approval through May 31, 2026, and invites public comments for an additional 30 days (deadline June 22, 2026). The FRP program requires owners or operators of certain oil‑storage facilities to prepare detailed plans that identify resources and procedures for responding to oil discharges, thereby reducing environmental harm and aiding emergency preparedness.

The renewal aims to maintain a robust data set that EPA uses to verify compliance, allocate response resources, and support state and local governments in planning for potential oil spills. Facilities that meet specific criteria—such as large storage capacity or risk factors like inadequate containment—must submit FRPs, which are reviewed and approved by EPA. The data collected are not confidential and are intended to improve the effectiveness of oil‑spill response across the United States.

By extending the ICR, EPA ensures continuity of the regulatory framework that underpins the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, while also providing stakeholders an opportunity to shape the data‑collection process. The public comment period allows industry, environmental groups, and other interested parties to influence how information is gathered and used in the future.

Key Elements

• ICR Renewal: Extension of EPA’s Oil Pollution Act Facility Response Plan data collection through May 31, 2026.
  
• OMB Control Number: 2050‑0135 (currently approved).
  
• Comment Period: 30 additional days, ending June 22, 2026.
  
• Purpose of FRPs: Identify resources and procedures for timely oil‑discharge response; reduce environmental impact.
  
• Applicability Criteria:
  
  • Facilities transferring oil over water with ≥42,000 gal storage, or
    
  • Facilities with ≥1 million gal storage plus one or more risk factors (e.g., inadequate containment, potential harm to wildlife or drinking water).
    
• Data Use: EPA reviews FRPs for compliance; data also support state/local emergency planning.
  
• Burden Estimate: Approximately 319,919 hours and $16,046,491 annually, with a noted decrease of 65,867 hours compared to the previous ICR.
  
• Confidentiality: No confidential or proprietary business information is expected; EPA does not provide confidentiality assurances.
  
• Submission: Comments via EPA’s online docket (Docket ID EPA‑HQ‑OLEM‑2018‑0105) or by mail to the EPA Docket Center.

Burley Asbestos Site: DOJ Seeks $350 k Reimbursement in New Consent Decree

Overview

On May 18 2026 the U.S. Department of Justice filed a proposed consent decree with the District Court for Idaho in the case v. Civil Action No. 4:25‑cv‑7‑AKB. The decree concerns the Burley Demolition Asbestos Site in Burley, Cassia County, Idaho, where the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has already conducted cleanup operations under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). The DOJ is requesting reimbursement of the EPA’s past response costs from the site’s former owner, Brek Pilling.

The proposed agreement requires Brek Pilling to pay $350,000 to cover the EPA’s incurred cleanup expenses. In return, the defendant will receive “contribution protection” and covenants not to sue under CERCLA Sections 107(a) and 113, shielding the EPA from future liability related to the site’s remediation. The decree also includes standard procedural provisions, such as the filing of the agreement in the court docket and the requirement that the EPA’s costs be fully covered.

The notice opens a 30‑day public comment period. Stakeholders—including local residents, environmental groups, and industry representatives—can submit written comments to the DOJ’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. Comments may be filed electronically or by mail, and the DOJ may incorporate them into the final decree. The outcome will determine whether the site’s cleanup costs are fully reimbursed and whether the EPA’s future liability is limited.

Key Elements

• Location & Site: Burley Demolition Asbestos Site, Burley, Cassia County, Idaho.
  
• Parties: U.S. Department of Justice (plaintiff), Brek Pilling (settling defendant).
  
• Reimbursement Amount: $350,000 to cover EPA’s past response costs.
  
• Legal Basis: CERCLA Sections 107(a) and 113, 42 U.S.C. 9607(a) and 9613.
  
• Protection Granted: Contribution protection and covenants not to sue for the EPA.
  
• Public Comment Period: 30 days from publication; comments addressed to the DOJ’s Environment and Natural Resources Division.
  
• Submission Channels: Email (pubcomment‑ees.enrd@usdoj.gov) or mail (P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044‑7611).
  
• Court Filing: Consent decree available for download on the DOJ website; may be filed by the U.S. in whole or part on the public docket.
  
• Implications: Determines financial recovery for EPA, limits future liability, and sets a precedent for handling asbestos-related remediation costs under CERCLA.

Flying into the Future: Air Force Plans to Upgrade Refueling Squadron at Michigan Base

Overview
The U.S. Air Force has announced its intent to conduct a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the relocation and expansion of a KC‑46A Pegasus aerial refueling squadron to Selfridge Air National Guard Base in Macomb County, Michigan. The move will replace the current fleet of eight KC‑135T Stratotankers with up to eight KC‑46 aircraft, or potentially up to twelve under an alternative scenario, modernizing the 127 Wing’s refueling capability in line with national defense priorities.

The notice invites public participation through a 30‑day scoping period, during which comments on alternatives, impacts, and relevant studies can be submitted online, by email, or by mail. The Air Force will use this input to shape the EIS, which is expected to be finalized in spring 2027. The process will involve federal, state, and local agencies, as well as federally recognized Native American tribes, to ensure comprehensive environmental review.

Key environmental considerations include aircraft noise, air quality, land use, and potential impacts on floodplain and water resources. The Air Force will seek all necessary permits and consult with stakeholders to address cultural, biological, and geological resources, as well as socio‑economic effects on the surrounding community.

Key Elements

• Purpose: Modernize the 127 Wing’s refueling mission by transitioning from KC‑135T Stratotankers to KC‑46A Pegasus aircraft.
  
• Proposed Action: Basing a squadron of up to eight KC‑46 aircraft at Selfridge Air National Guard Base, with an alternative of up to twelve aircraft.
  
• Scoping Period: 30 days for public comments on alternatives, impacts, and studies.
  
• Timeline: Final EIS anticipated in spring 2027.
  
• Environmental Scope:
  
  • Airspace and noise impacts from increased aircraft operations.
    
  • Air quality and emissions from newer aircraft and associated infrastructure.
    
  • Land‑use changes, including potential construction of parking, maintenance facilities, and support infrastructure.
    
  • Water resources and floodplain considerations, with early notice to floodplain‑management authorities.
    
  • Biological, cultural, and geological resources, including consultation with federally recognized Native American tribes.
    
• Stakeholder Engagement: Consultation with federal, state, local agencies, and the public to identify issues and gather data for the EIS.
  
• Regulatory Framework: Compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Executive Order 11988 on floodplain management, and other applicable federal statutes.
  
• Public Participation: Comments can be submitted online, by email, or by mail; the Air Force encourages community input to shape the environmental analysis.

Pelican Power: Alaska Town Moves Toward a New 0.7‑MW Hydropower License

Overview

The City of Pelican, Alaska, has applied for a new minor license for its existing 0.7‑megawatt Pelican Project, a small hydropower facility on Pelican Creek. Because the current license lacks waivers for sections 14 and 15 of the Federal Power Act, the new application will result in a completely new license under federal regulations.

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) staff have determined that issuing this license would not constitute a major federal action that significantly affects the human environment. Accordingly, the Commission has announced its intent to prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) to evaluate the project’s environmental impacts. The EA will be publicly released and open to comment, with all feedback considered before the final licensing decision.

The EA is scheduled for issuance on January 29, 2027, and the Commission encourages public participation through comments, interventions, or requests for rehearing. Contact information for the Office of Public Participation and the Commission’s staff is provided for those wishing to engage in the review process.

Key Elements

• Project Scope: 0.7‑MW hydropower facility on Pelican Creek, Alaska.
  
• License Status: New minor license application; existing license lacks required waivers, necessitating a new license under 18 CFR 16.2(a).
  
• Environmental Review: FERC staff issued a Notice of Readiness for Environmental Analysis (REA) and will prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA).
  
• Impact Assessment: Staff anticipates no major federal action; the EA will confirm environmental effects.
  
• Public Participation: EA will be circulated for public comment; all comments will inform the final licensing decision.
  
• Timeline: EA issuance slated for January 29, 2027; schedule may be revised as needed.
  
• Contact Points: Office of Public Participation (202) 502‑6595; Ingrid Brofman (202) 502‑8347 for inquiries.
  
• Regulatory Framework: Process governed by the Federal Power Act, 18 CFR 2.1, and the National Environmental Policy Act.

FERC Sets Timeline for New Minnesota Gas Pipeline Expansion and Abandonment Review

Overview
The U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has announced a schedule for preparing an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Ventura‑to‑Farmington A‑Line Abandonment and Capacity Replacement Project (V2F) and the Northern Lights 2027 Expansion Project (NL27). These projects aim to replace the capacity lost from abandoning 131 miles of aging 16‑inch pipeline and to add an additional 79,303 dekatherms per day of firm natural‑gas service across Iowa and Minnesota. The EA will be released on October 2, 2026, followed by a 30‑day public comment period, with a federal authorization decision deadline of December 31, 2026.

The V2F project will construct roughly 18 miles of new 36‑inch and 30‑inch pipelines, while the NL27 project will add about 28.5 miles of pipelines ranging from 4‑inch to 36‑inch, a compressor‑station uprate, and associated above‑ground facilities. Both projects share two key pipeline extensions (Lake Mills M500 E‑line and Albert Lea M500 E‑line) that will be built concurrently. The combined effort is designed to maintain service reliability and meet growing demand in the region.

Stakeholders—including landowners, local governments, Native American tribes, and environmental groups—have already submitted comments, primarily concerning compensation, property values, and construction impacts. FERC’s EA will address these concerns and outline the environmental and regulatory steps required before the projects can proceed.

Key Elements

• Project Scope

  • Abandon 131 mi of 16‑inch pipeline (Ventura‑to‑Farmington).
    
  • Build ~18 mi of 36‑inch/30‑inch extensions (V2F).
    
  • Construct ~28.5 mi of varied‑diameter pipelines, compressor‑station uprate, and above‑ground facilities (NL27).
    
  • Total incremental firm service: 79,303 dekatherms/day.

• Timeline

  • EA issuance: October 2, 2026.
    
  • 30‑day public comment period.
    
  • Federal authorization decision deadline: December 31, 2026.

• Regulatory Framework

  • FERC’s Notice of Application (March 16, 2026) and Notice of Scoping (April 13, 2026).
    
  • Compliance with the Natural Gas Act (Sections 7(b) & 7©).
    
  • 90‑day decision window for federal agencies and state agencies acting under federal authority.

• Stakeholder Engagement

  • Comments received from landowners on compensation and property impacts.
    
  • EA will address all substantive comments.
    
  • Public participation avenues: eSubscription, eLibrary, Office of Public Participation.

• Environmental Review

  • Unique NOPR ID: EAXX‑019‑20‑000‑1776779749.
    
  • EA will assess environmental impacts, mitigation measures, and compliance with NEPA.
    

• Geoscience & Resource Implications

  • Pipeline routing through Freeborn, Steele, Dakota, and other Minnesota counties.
    
  • Potential effects on land use, agricultural operations, and local ecosystems.
    
  • Infrastructure upgrades to support regional energy security and market stability.

Renewable Energy vs. Landscape: EU’s “Priority” Rule Explained

Overview

The European Union introduced Regulation (EU) 2022/2577 to speed up the deployment of renewable energy, especially wind and solar, in response to the energy crisis triggered by Russia’s war in Ukraine. Article 3(2) of the regulation gives renewable‑energy projects “priority” when authorities balance competing legal interests—such as environmental protection, heritage conservation, and local planning—during the permit‑granting process.

In Belgium, the Walloon Region denied a permit for two wind turbines in Namur, citing visual and heritage impacts. The Belgian Council of State asked the Court of Justice to clarify how Article 3(2) should be applied. Advocate General Rantos delivered an opinion that:

1. Priority is not limited to environmental directives – it extends to other protected interests, including landscape and heritage.
2. “Recognised as overriding public interest” can be satisfied by the regulation’s rebuttable presumption; explicit recognition is only needed for interests not covered by that presumption (e.g., heritage).
3. Priority is a principle, not an absolute rule – Member States may refuse a project if they can provide detailed, reasoned justification that a protected interest is adversely affected.

These interpretations aim to balance the urgent need for clean energy with the protection of cultural and natural values, ensuring that national authorities retain meaningful discretion while still giving renewable projects a clear advantage in the permitting process.

Key Elements

• Regulation (EU) 2022/2577

  • Temporary emergency rules to accelerate renewable‑energy permits.
    
  • Article 3(1): rebuttable presumption that renewable projects are of overriding public interest for certain EU environmental directives.
    
  • Article 3(2): requires that, for projects recognised as overriding public interest, authorities give them priority when balancing legal interests.

• Scope of Priority

  • Applies to all legal interests considered in the permit process, not just the three environmental directives (habitats, water, birds).
    
  • Includes landscape and heritage protection, as well as other national planning concerns.

• Recognition of Overriding Public Interest

  • For environmental directives: automatic presumption unless rebutted.
    
  • For heritage or other non‑directive interests: requires explicit recognition by the Member State, based on a case‑by‑case assessment.

• Nature of Priority

  • “Priority in principle”: authorities must weigh renewable projects more heavily but can depart from this if they provide specific, detailed reasons.
    
  • No absolute guarantee of permit approval; permits can still be refused if a protected interest is demonstrably harmed.

• Implications for Member States

  • Must document how they applied the priority rule in each case.
    
  • Must balance energy security with environmental and cultural protection, ensuring transparency and reasoned decision‑making.
    
  • Provides a clearer legal framework for permitting renewable projects while preserving national planning autonomy.

• Relevance to Geoscience & Natural Resources

  • Clarifies how renewable energy development interacts with landscape, heritage, and biodiversity protection.
    
  • Offers guidance for scientists, planners, and developers on navigating EU and national permitting regimes during the energy transition.

EU Court Clarifies Insurance Rules for Climate‑Damage Aid to Farmers

Overview

The Court of Justice of the European Union has ruled on how Article 25(9) of Regulation (EU) No 702/2014 should be applied when state aid compensates small and medium‑sized agricultural enterprises for losses caused by adverse climatic events. The case arose from Belgian farmers who suffered drought damage and received compensation from the Walloon region, only to have their aid reduced by 50 % because they had not taken out insurance covering at least 50 % of their production or the most frequent climatic risks in Belgium.

The Court held that the 50 % reduction applies only when a beneficiary lacks insurance covering the statistically most frequent climatic risks in the Member State or region, regardless of whether the specific event that caused the loss is among those risks. Importantly, if insurance that meets the regulation’s conditions is unavailable for the type of production involved, the aid must not be reduced. This interpretation aligns with the regulation’s objective of encouraging risk management while ensuring that farmers are not penalised when suitable insurance products do not exist.

The decision clarifies the interaction between EU state‑aid rules and national insurance markets, providing guidance for future compensation schemes and for farmers seeking to navigate the insurance‑requirement threshold.

Key Elements

• Article 25(9) Interpretation: The 50 % reduction applies only when the beneficiary has no insurance covering at least 50 % of their average annual production or production‑related income and the most frequent climatic risks in the Member State or region.
• Specific Event Irrelevant: The nature of the climatic event that caused the loss (e.g., drought) is not a factor in determining whether the aid is reduced.
• Insurance Availability: If the insurance market does not offer coverage that satisfies the regulation’s conditions for the beneficiary’s type of production, the aid is not subject to the 50 % reduction.
• Encouragement of Risk Management: The rule is designed to incentivise farmers to obtain insurance against the risks they are most exposed to, thereby reducing dependence on state aid.
• Implications for Farmers: Farmers must assess whether suitable insurance exists for their specific production; lack of such coverage protects them from aid reduction.
• Impact on State Aid Schemes: National authorities must verify insurance availability before applying the reduction, ensuring compliance with EU internal‑market rules.
• Future Guidance: The judgment provides a clear framework for interpreting similar provisions in other EU state‑aid regulations and for designing compensation schemes that respect both risk‑management objectives and market realities.

GEO Act: Fast‑Track Geothermal Leasing Amid Legal Hurdles

Overview

The Geothermal Energy Opportunity Act (GEO Act) seeks to streamline the federal permitting process for geothermal projects by imposing a firm 60‑day deadline for the Secretary of the Interior to approve or deny applications related to geothermal leasing, drilling permits, and related authorizations. This deadline applies even when a civil action is pending against the lease or permit, provided no federal court has vacated or granted injunctive relief. The act does not alter the courts’ existing authority to intervene; it simply ensures that the administrative review proceeds on schedule unless a court explicitly stops it.

By codifying this time constraint, the GEO Act aims to reduce uncertainty for developers, accelerate project development, and encourage investment in geothermal energy—a clean, renewable resource that taps the Earth’s internal heat. The bill also reaffirms that all standard environmental and wildlife safeguards—such as the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA)—must still be satisfied before a decision is made.

The legislation has been placed on the Union Calendar (No. 568) and is awaiting further consideration by Congress. If enacted, it would represent a significant shift toward a more predictable and efficient permitting regime for geothermal energy projects across the United States.

Key Elements

• 60‑Day Decision Deadline: The Secretary must approve or deny each geothermal leasing application within 60 days after completing all required federal reviews, regardless of pending civil litigation.
• Unchanged Court Authority: The act does not grant new powers to federal courts; courts retain the ability to vacate or provide injunctive relief on geothermal leases or permits.
• Environmental Compliance Remains Mandatory: All decisions must still comply with NEPA, the ESA, and other applicable federal regulations before the 60‑day deadline is met.
• Definition of “Authorization”: Clarifies that any license, permit, approval, or administrative decision required for a geothermal project counts as an authorization subject to the deadline.
• Encouragement of Geothermal Development: By reducing administrative delays, the act seeks to attract investment and accelerate the deployment of geothermal energy as part of the U.S. renewable energy portfolio.

Geothermal Cost‑Recovery Act: Turning Hot Resources into Hot Accounts

Overview

The Geothermal Cost‑Recovery Authority Act of 2025 amends the 1970 Geothermal Steam Act to give the U.S. Department of the Interior the power to recover administrative and inspection costs from parties that apply for or hold geothermal leases. The new authority is in effect from the day the bill becomes law until September 30, 2032, covering the full spectrum of lease‑related activities—from application processing to drilling, plugging, and site reclamation.

The legislation is designed to help the Interior offset the growing expenses of managing geothermal resources on public lands. By allowing the Secretary to charge lease holders for “reasonable” costs, the Act aims to free up discretionary funds for future geothermal development and stewardship. The bill also includes safeguards: the Secretary may reduce or waive reimbursements if full payment would impose an economic hardship or if a lower amount better promotes resource use.

A key component is a five‑year report that will evaluate the impact of the cost‑recovery mechanism on the Bureau of Land Management’s geothermal program and recommend whether the provision should be renewed or revised. This transparency requirement ensures that industry stakeholders and the public can assess whether the new authority is achieving its intended goals.

Key Elements

• Cost‑Recovery Authority: The Secretary may require lease applicants or holders to reimburse the U.S. for administrative and inspection costs related to geothermal leasing and operations.
  
• Coverage Period: The authority applies from enactment until September 30, 2032.
  
• Scope of Costs: Includes processing of lease applications, operations plans, drilling permits, site licenses, construction permits, commercial use permits, and all related approvals.
  
• Inspection and Monitoring Fees: Reimbursement extends to costs for inspecting geophysical exploration, drilling, plugging, abandonment, construction, operation, termination, and reclamation of geothermal sites.
  
• Consideration of Cost‑Share Agreements: The Secretary will assess existing cooperative cost‑share arrangements before demanding reimbursement.
  
• Adjustments for Hardship or Resource Promotion: Reimbursement amounts can be reduced if full payment would cause economic hardship or if a lower amount better promotes geothermal resource use.
  
• Use of Recovered Funds: Collected amounts are credited to the Department of the Interior’s appropriation, account, or fund as discretionary offsetting collections, earmarked for the same categories of costs they cover.
  
• Reporting Requirement: Within five years, the Secretary must submit a public report to congressional committees and the Interior website, assessing the amendment’s effects, recommending reauthorization, and suggesting program updates.
  
• Stakeholder Consultation: The report must incorporate input from the geothermal industry and other stakeholders to ensure balanced oversight.

Long‑Term Leasing Gets a 99‑Year Boost for Wampanoag Lands

Overview

The Senate has referred H.R. 681 to the Committee on Indian Affairs, where it is slated for a favorable report. The bill amends the 1955 Long‑Term Leasing Act to allow leases of up to 99 years on land within the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe Reservation and on land held in trust for the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah). By extending the lease horizon, the legislation gives these tribes greater flexibility to plan long‑term development projects, including renewable‑energy installations, infrastructure upgrades, and other economic ventures that require a stable, long‑duration land base.

The amendment preserves the core framework of the Long‑Term Leasing Act—ensuring that leases remain subject to federal oversight and that the land remains under tribal trust—while expanding the lease term to match contemporary development needs. This change acknowledges the evolving economic landscape and the importance of enabling tribal communities to secure long‑term investment and stewardship opportunities.

For geoscientists, energy developers, and natural‑resource professionals, the bill signals a potential increase in opportunities for large‑scale projects on tribal lands. It also underscores the need for careful environmental assessment and collaboration with tribal authorities to balance development with ecological stewardship.

Key Elements

• 99‑Year Lease Authority – Extends the maximum lease term from the current limit to 99 years for Mashpee Wampanoag and Aquinnah lands.
  
• Specific Tribal Coverage – Applies explicitly to the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe Reservation and land held in trust for the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah).
  
• Amendment to Long‑Term Leasing Act – Inserts the tribal names into the statutory text, preserving existing lease conditions while expanding duration.
  
• Economic Development Potential – Enables long‑term renewable‑energy projects, infrastructure, and other ventures that require extended land use rights.
  
• Federal Oversight Maintained – Leases remain subject to federal review, ensuring compliance with environmental and land‑use regulations.
  
• Tribal Sovereignty and Stewardship – Supports tribal self‑determination in land management while encouraging responsible natural‑resource use.

Extending Lease Horizons: 99‑Year Leases for Wampanoag Lands

Overview

The Senate introduced a bill that amends the 1955 Long‑Term Leasing Act to allow leases of up to 99 years on land within the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe Reservation and on land held in trust for the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah). By inserting these tribal lands into the Act’s leasing framework, the bill seeks to provide a stable, long‑term lease option for developers, businesses, and other entities interested in using these lands for a variety of purposes.

The amendment preserves the federal oversight and safeguards that have historically governed leasing on Native American lands, while giving the tribes greater flexibility to negotiate long‑term agreements that can support economic development, infrastructure projects, and community initiatives. It also clarifies that the lease authority applies specifically to the Mashpee and Aquinnah tribes, ensuring that the provisions are tailored to their unique legal and cultural contexts.

If enacted, the bill could open new avenues for investment and partnership on tribal lands, potentially boosting local economies and creating jobs. At the same time, it will require careful stewardship to balance development goals with the protection of cultural resources, environmental integrity, and tribal sovereignty.

Key Elements

• 99‑Year Lease Authority – Grants the ability to enter into leases lasting up to 99 years on designated tribal lands.
  
• Specific Tribal Inclusion – Explicitly adds the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe Reservation and land held in trust for the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah) to the Long‑Term Leasing Act.
  
• Federal Oversight – Maintains the existing federal framework for lease approvals, ensuring compliance with environmental and cultural protection standards.
  
• Economic Development Potential – Enables long‑term planning for businesses, infrastructure, and community projects that can benefit tribal economies.
  
• Sovereignty and Cultural Protection – Requires that lease agreements respect tribal sovereignty, cultural sites, and natural resources.
  
• Committee Status – Currently in the Committee on Indian Affairs, ordered to be reported favorably without amendment.

EESC Endorses EU Plan to Secure Critical Raw Materials for a Sustainable Future

The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) has issued a unanimous opinion supporting the European Parliament and Council’s proposal to amend Regulation (EU) 2024/1252. The amendment seeks to establish a robust framework that guarantees a secure and sustainable supply of critical raw materials (CRMs), which are essential for the EU’s transition to greener technologies and resilient supply chains.

By endorsing the proposal, the EESC signals strong confidence that the regulation will strengthen the EU’s strategic autonomy in key minerals, reduce dependence on external suppliers, and promote responsible sourcing practices. The committee’s backing follows its earlier stance on the Critical Raw Materials Act, underscoring a consistent commitment to safeguarding the raw material base that underpins advanced manufacturing, renewable energy, and digital infrastructure.

For professionals in geoscience, energy, and natural resources, the regulation’s provisions will shape research priorities, mining policies, and trade negotiations. It also aligns with environmental objectives by encouraging circular economy measures and reducing the ecological footprint of raw material extraction.

Key Elements

• Unanimous endorsement: 184 votes for, 0 against, 2 abstentions.
  
• Legal basis: Articles 114 and 294 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
  
• Reference to prior opinion: Builds on the EESC’s 2023 opinion on the Critical Raw Materials Act.
  
• Objective: Establish a framework for a secure, sustainable supply of critical raw materials.
  
• Scope: Amends Regulation (EU) 2024/1252 and related directives on raw materials.
  
• Strategic relevance: Supports the EU’s twin transition to climate neutrality and digital resilience.
  
• Implications for trade: Aims to reduce supply chain vulnerabilities and promote fair competition.
  
• Environmental focus: Encourages responsible extraction, recycling, and circular economy practices.

EU Regional Leaders Call for a Cohesive, Resilient Future in the 2027 Work Programme

Overview

The Conference of Presidents of the European Committee of the Regions (CoR) has issued a declaration urging the European Commission to embed territorial cohesion and local participation at the heart of its 2027 Work Programme. The document stresses that every legislative proposal should be accompanied by an ex‑ante Territorial Impact Assessment (TIA) to safeguard the principle of “do no harm to cohesion” and to ensure that policies benefit all three categories of regions—less developed, transition, and more developed.

Key priorities focus on strengthening the EU’s natural resource base and environmental resilience. The CoR calls for a stable, dedicated budget for cohesion policy, a robust strategy for energy security that promotes local Energy Communities, and a comprehensive plan for water infrastructure upgrades, nature‑based solutions, and PFAS pollution control. It also demands that the upcoming EU Biodiversity Strategy and Zero Pollution Action Plan incorporate local and regional expertise.

Beyond environmental concerns, the declaration covers a broad spectrum of social, digital, and security issues—ranging from digital sovereignty and the Digital Fairness Act to defence cluster mapping and the protection of rule of law at the territorial level—underscoring the interconnectedness of territorial well‑being with the broader EU agenda.

Key Elements (Geoscience & Natural Resource Focus)

• Territorial Impact Assessments: Mandatory ex‑ante TIAs for all Commission proposals to protect territorial cohesion.
  
• Cohesion Budget: Call for a stable, dedicated budget covering all three regional categories, with a “do no harm” principle across EU funds.
  
• Local Energy Communities: Support for decentralised energy generation, affordability, and resilience at the regional level.
  
• Water Infrastructure & Nature‑Based Solutions: Urgent mobilisation of public and private investment for water upgrades, leakage reduction, digitalisation, and nature‑based flood protection.
  
• PFAS Pollution: Decisive action required to address PFAS contamination in water and soil.
  
• Biodiversity Strategy: Invitation to involve local and regional authorities in drafting a post‑2030 EU Biodiversity Strategy.
  
• Zero Pollution Action Plan: Strengthened cooperation with the CoR, including a review of the REACH framework and the Zero Pollution Stakeholder Platform.
  
• Energy Security & Defence Clusters: Mapping of defence‑related clusters at the regional level and integration into an EU defence supply chain strategy.
  
• Digital and Technological Sovereignty: Calls for decentralised digital initiatives, faster digital fitness checks, and enforcement of digital legislation to protect local economies.
  
• Social Cohesion Measures: Emphasis on housing affordability, child and youth strategies, and anti‑poverty policies with clear local implementation roles.
  

These provisions collectively aim to ensure that the EU’s environmental, energy, and social policies are grounded in territorial realities, fostering a more resilient and inclusive European Union.

DOE Ends Decades‑Old Renewable Energy Incentive Program as Funding Runs Out

Overview
The Renewable Energy Production Incentive (REPI) program, created by Congress in 1992 to encourage electricity generation from renewable sources by state entities and non‑profit cooperatives, was administered by the Department of Energy (DOE) under 10 CFR Part 451. Although the program was active for more than two decades, appropriations for incentive payments ceased in Fiscal Year 2009, and the statute now imposes a hard sunset date of September 30 2026.

On May 2026, DOE issued a final rule rescinding the regulations that governed REPI, effective October 1 2026. The rule formally ends the program and eliminates the regulatory framework that had become obsolete, as no further payments can be made after the statutory deadline.

The cancellation does not create new costs or obligations for states, local governments, or private entities. Instead, it signals that other federal and state incentives—such as tax credits, loan guarantees, and grant programs—will continue to support renewable energy development. The rule also confirms that the removal of the program will not impose significant economic burdens on small businesses, will not trigger federal mandates, and requires no additional environmental review.

Key Elements

• Sunset and Payment Deadline – No REPI incentive payments after September 30 2026; program ends with the statutory sunset.
  
• Regulatory Removal – 10 CFR Part 451 is rescinded and reserved, eliminating the obsolete regulatory framework.
  
• Funding Status – Last appropriated funds were in FY 2009; no new federal funding is authorized for REPI.
  
• Alternative Incentives – Other federal mechanisms (tax credits, loan guarantees, grants) remain available to support renewable energy projects.
  
• Economic Impact – DOE determined the rule will not have a significant economic impact on small entities; no new paperwork or compliance burden.
  
• Federal Mandate – The rule does not impose a federal intergovernmental mandate and is not expected to cost states or local governments $100 million or more.
  
• Environmental Review – Classified as an administrative, routine action; no NEPA review required.
  
• Effective Date – The rescission takes effect on October 1 2026, aligning with the statutory sunset.

NRC Green‑Lights Small Modular Reactors in Texas, Skipping Full Environmental Review

Overview

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has issued an Environmental Assessment (EA) and a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for a construction permit (CP) to Long Mott Energy, LLC (LME) for the proposed Long Mott Generating Station (LMGS) in Seadrift, Texas. The permit would authorize the construction of four Xe‑100 small modular reactors (SMRs) that use solid tri‑structural isotropic (TRISO) fuel and a helium gas cooling system. The project is intended to replace an aging natural‑gas cogeneration plant and to demonstrate advanced reactor technology under the U.S. Department of Energy’s Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program.

To satisfy the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements, the NRC normally must prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for a construction permit of a nuclear power reactor. After reviewing the environmental report submitted by LME, the NRC staff determined that the potential impacts would be small and that an EIS was unnecessary. Consequently, the NRC granted one‑time exemptions from specific NEPA‑related regulations (10 CFR 51.20(b)(1), 51.25, and 51.75(a)) and issued the EA and FONSI instead.

The EA evaluated impacts on 16 environmental resource areas—including land use, air quality, water resources, ecology, historic and cultural resources, and human health—and concluded that the effects would be negligible. The exemptions themselves were found to have no additional environmental impact. The NRC’s decision aligns with its “Principles of Good Regulation,” emphasizing efficiency and timely decision‑making while maintaining public safety and environmental protection.

Key Elements

• Construction Permit: Authorization for four Xe‑100 SMRs at Seadrift, Texas.
  
• Technology: Helium‑cooled, TRISO‑fuel reactors designed for high‑temperature operation.
  
• Exemptions Granted: One‑time waivers of 10 CFR 51.20(b)(1), 51.25, and 51.75(a) to allow an EA/FONSI instead of an EIS.
  
• Environmental Findings:
  
  • Small impacts across 16 resource areas (land use, air, water, ecology, cultural sites, socioeconomics, waste management, etc.).
    
  • No significant effect on the human environment; exemptions add no additional impact.
    
• Project Purpose: Replace a fossil‑fuel cogeneration plant and demonstrate advanced SMR technology.
  
• Regulatory Context: Decision based on NEPA’s flexibility for actions with no foreseeable significant environmental effect.
  
• Public Access: Documents available through the NRC’s ADAMS system and the public document room.

U.S. Ocean Observing System Opens Doors: Public Meeting to Shape Coastal Data Strategy

Overview

The U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS®) Advisory Committee, established under the Integrated Coastal and Ocean Observation System Act and the Coordinated Ocean Observations and Research Act of 2020, convenes to guide NOAA’s ocean‑observation strategy. The upcoming virtual meeting on June 16–17, 2026 will review recent NOAA updates, finalize the current work‑plan recommendations, and solicit input from stakeholders across the geoscience, energy, and natural‑resource sectors.

This open‑to‑public session offers a rare opportunity for scientists, industry representatives, and community groups to influence how ocean data are collected, shared, and applied to coastal management, climate resilience, and resource development. Participants can submit written comments by June 8 and present brief oral statements (up to three minutes) during the meeting.

The committee’s deliberations will shape the next phase of the IOOS program, ensuring that ocean‑observation networks remain robust, interoperable, and responsive to emerging scientific and policy needs.

Key Elements

• Meeting Dates & Times
  
  • June 16, 2026: 11 a.m.–1 p.m. EDT
    
  • June 17, 2026: 2 p.m.–4 p.m. EDT
    
• Format: Virtual; registration required by June 15, 2026.
  
• Agenda Focus
  
  1. NOAA and partner updates on ocean‑observation initiatives.
     
  2. Finalization of recommendations from the current work plan.
     
• Public Participation
  
  • Written comments due by June 8, 2026, 11:59 p.m. EDT.
    
  • Oral statements limited to 3 minutes; must not repeat prior submissions.
    
  • All comments become part of the public record; sensitive information remains public.
    
• Accessibility
  
  • Sign‑language interpretation and other accommodations available; request by June 9, 2026.
    
• Contact & Registration
  
  • Designated Federal Official: Krisa Arzayus (240‑533‑9455).
    
  • Registration and comment submission via the IOOS website or email.
    
• Background
  
  • IOOS Advisory Committee advises NOAA Administrator and the Interagency Ocean Observation Committee on policy, coordination, and resource allocation for ocean‑observation systems.

NIST’s New Pilot Program Aims to Revolutionize Aerospace Parts and Secure U.S. Mineral Supply

Overview

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), in partnership with the U.S. Department of Commerce, has announced a competitive pilot program under the Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP). The initiative seeks to accelerate the adoption and commercialization of advanced manufacturing technologies that strengthen the domestic industrial base. By focusing on two high‑priority areas—additive manufacturing for aerospace components and the development of a domestic critical minerals supply chain—NIST aims to create shared technology frameworks that can be rapidly deployed across the U.S. manufacturing ecosystem.

The program will award approximately $20 million per project over a two‑year period, using funds appropriated in 2025 and 2026. Only current MEP center primary awardees and consortiums of such centers are eligible to apply. The pilot will bring together industry, academia, federal laboratories, and state/local governments to design and validate technology platforms that lower entry barriers for small and medium‑sized manufacturers (SMMs) and streamline fragmented supply chains.

By fostering collaboration across public and private sectors, the pilot seeks to reduce U.S. dependence on foreign manufacturing capabilities, enhance national security, and boost economic competitiveness. Successful projects will demonstrate how advanced manufacturing can transform supply chains, create new market opportunities, and position the United States as a leader in critical technologies.

Key Elements

• Program Structure: Competitive pilot under the MEP National Network, leveraging NIST’s measurement science and the Manufacturing USA network.
  
• Focus Areas:
  
  1. Additive manufacturing (3D printing) for aerospace components.
     
  2. Development of a domestic critical minerals supply chain.
     
• Funding & Timeline: ~ $20 million per project, 2‑year duration, with a Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) expected in Q2 2026.
  
• Eligibility: Current MEP center primary awardees and consortiums of such centers only.
  
• Collaboration Model: Industry, academic, federal laboratory, and state/local government partners form consortiums to develop shared technology frameworks.
  
• Objectives: Accelerate technology adoption, reduce barriers for SMMs, transform fragmented supply chains into robust ecosystems, and enhance U.S. competitiveness and national security.
  
• Legal Authority: Program authorized under 15 U.S.C. 278k‑1.
  
• Impact on MEP Centers: The pilot will not reduce the number of active MEP centers; it will add new funding opportunities for existing centers.

Kinder Morgan’s Texas Access Pipeline: FERC Sets 90‑Day Environmental Review Timeline

Overview
Kinder Morgan Louisiana Pipeline LLC (KMLP) has filed a request with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to build the Texas Access Project, a new natural‑gas pipeline that would allow the company to transport up to 1.3 million dekatherms per day from Texas interconnections to its existing system. The project includes a 3‑mile mainline extension, several short‑length connections to existing lines, and new metering facilities at key terminals.

FERC has announced that it will prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the project, with the EA to be issued on September 18, 2026. A 30‑day public comment period will follow, and all federal agencies responsible for authorizations must reach a decision within 90 days of the EA’s release—by December 17, 2026. This schedule aligns with the Natural Gas Act’s requirement that federal approvals be completed within that timeframe.

Stakeholders—including environmental groups, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and Louisiana’s Department of Environmental Quality—have already submitted comments on potential impacts to air quality, water resources, wildlife habitats, wetlands, and cultural resources. The EA will address these concerns, and any substantive comments will be incorporated before the final decision.

Key Elements

• Project Scope: 3.05‑mile, 48‑inch mainline extension in Texas and Louisiana; 540 ft of 42‑inch pipe to Trident Intrastate Pipeline; 70 ft to Texas Header; 250 ft to existing KMLP legs; new regulator and metering upgrades at Sabine Pass and Woodside LNG Terminal.
• Capacity: Up to 1,300,000 dekatherms per day of natural gas transport.
• Timeline: EA issuance September 18, 2026; 30‑day comment period; 90‑day federal authorization deadline December 17, 2026.
• Regulatory Framework: Natural Gas Act Section 7©; National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) EA; FERC’s 90‑day decision rule (18 CFR 157.22(a)).
• Environmental Focus Areas: Air quality, water quality, wetlands, biological resources, wildlife habitat, groundwater, hazardous materials, cultural resources, and tribal consultation.
• Stakeholder Engagement: Public scoping notice issued April 17, 2026; comments received from Our Children’s Trust, USEPA Region 6, and LDEQ; all substantive comments to be addressed in the EA.
• Public Participation: eSubscription service for updates; eLibrary access to docket documents; contact information for public inquiries and interventions.

FERC Calls Tribal Consultation for Ozark Beach Hydroelectric Project

Overview

The U.S. Department of Energy and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) have announced a teleconference on June 2, 2026, to discuss the proposed Ozark Beach Hydroelectric Project (Project No. 2221‑041) with representatives from the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the Missouri State Historic Preservation Office, the Osage Nation, and the Delaware Nation. The meeting aims to address concerns about potential impacts on archaeological sites and Native American cultural resources that may arise from the project’s development.

The consultation is part of FERC’s requirement to engage tribal and historic preservation stakeholders early in the permitting process. Attendees will review the Advisory Council’s findings and explore mitigation strategies to protect culturally significant locations. While intervenors may join the session, participation will be limited to the designated representatives and FERC staff to ensure focused dialogue.

After the meeting, FERC will publish a summary in the public record, providing both a redacted version that excludes sensitive location details and an unredacted privileged version for internal use. Intervenors wishing to attend must notify FERC staff by May 26, 2026.

Key Elements

• Meeting Details: June 2, 2026, 11:00 a.m. EDT, teleconference.
• Participants: Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, Missouri State Historic Preservation Office, Osage Nation, Delaware Nation, and FERC staff.
• Purpose: Discuss concerns about archaeological and cultural resource impacts of the Ozark Beach Hydroelectric Project.
• Intervenor Access: Allowed but limited to the above representatives and FERC staff.
• Sensitive Information Handling: Tribal representatives may disclose location details; non‑tribal attendees will be excused during that portion and may rejoin afterward.
• Public Record: Meeting summary will be posted, with both redacted and unredacted versions.
• Notification Requirement: Intervenors must contact Michael Davis by 5 p.m. EDT, May 26, 2026.

Expanding Conservation Space While Granting Pipeline Rights: The Sloan Canyon Act

Overview

The Sloan Canyon Conservation and Lateral Pipeline Act, signed into law by President Biden, revises the boundaries of the Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area in Nevada. The amendment increases the protected acreage from 48,438 to 57,728 acres and updates the official map to reflect the expanded area. While the act broadens conservation coverage, it also creates a new right‑of‑way for the Horizon Lateral Pipeline, allowing the Southern Nevada Water Authority to construct and operate a water transmission line outside the conservation area’s limits.

The legislation balances environmental stewardship with infrastructure needs. It permits the pipeline authority to excavate and dispose of sand, gravel, and other materials generated during tunneling, provided a memorandum of understanding is signed within 30 days to identify suitable federal land for disposal. The act imposes strict conditions to protect conservation resources, prohibits permanent adverse impacts on surface resources, and bars pipeline construction through wilderness-designated zones.

Importantly, the act preserves existing utility corridors and does not alter the overall management framework of the conservation area. Existing rights-of-way for utilities remain valid, and the Bureau of Land Management retains authority to authorize new utility facilities within designated corridors under applicable environmental laws.

Key Elements

• Boundary Expansion: Conservation area increased to 57,728 acres; new map titled “Proposed Sloan Canyon Expansion” (May 20 2024).
  
• Pipeline Right‑of‑Way: Grants the Southern Nevada Water Authority a temporary and permanent right‑of‑way for the Horizon Lateral Pipeline, free of rent or charges.
  
• Excavation & Disposal: Authority may excavate and use or dispose of materials from pipeline tunneling without payment, subject to a memorandum of understanding with the Bureau of Land Management.
  
• Protection Conditions:
  
  • Pipeline construction must not permanently damage surface resources.
    
  • No construction through or under wilderness areas.
    
  • Reasonable terms may be added to safeguard conservation resources.
    
• Utility Corridor Preservation: Existing utility transmission corridors and rights‑of‑way remain valid; new facilities can be authorized within these corridors under NEPA and other laws.
  
• Management Continuity: The act does not change the overall management of the conservation area; existing BLM policies continue to apply.

EEA Updates Water Substance Watch List: New EU Monitoring Rules Take Effect

Overview
The European Economic Area (EEA) Joint Committee has amended Annex XX of the EEA Agreement to incorporate the EU Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/439, which establishes a watch list of substances for Union‑wide monitoring in the field of water policy. This new decision replaces the earlier Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/1307, thereby updating the framework for monitoring potentially harmful substances in water bodies across all EEA member and participating states.

The amendment aligns the EEA’s environmental monitoring regime with the EU’s Directive 2008/105/EC on water quality, ensuring that water‑related data collection, assessment, and reporting are consistent across the entire EEA. By adopting the new watch list, the EEA strengthens its capacity to detect, assess, and manage chemical risks in aquatic ecosystems, supporting broader environmental protection and sustainable resource use.

The decision entered into force on 7 February 2026, following the required notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement. It is published in the Official Journal of the European Union and its Icelandic and Norwegian texts are authenticated, guaranteeing legal clarity for all participating parties.

Key Elements

• Incorporation of EU Decision ²⁰²⁵⁄₄₃₉ – Adds a new, Union‑wide watch list of substances for water monitoring to Annex XX of the EEA Agreement.
  
• Replacement of Decision ²⁰²²⁄₁₃₀₇ – The earlier watch list is repealed and removed from the EEA Agreement.
  
• Alignment with EU Water Directive – Ensures that EEA monitoring practices comply with Directive 2008/105/EC on water quality.
  
• Entry into Force – Effective 7 February 2026 after notifications, guaranteeing timely implementation.
  
• Publication and Authenticated Texts – Officially published in the EEA Supplement; Icelandic and Norwegian versions are authenticated.
  
• Cross‑Border Data Sharing – Facilitates consistent monitoring and data exchange among EEA member states and participating countries.
  
• Implications for Geoscience and Natural Resources – Enhances the collection of water‑quality data critical for environmental assessment, resource management, and policy compliance.
  
• Support for Environmental Protection – Strengthens the ability to detect and mitigate chemical pollution in aquatic ecosystems.

Water Conservation Rebate Tax Parity Act: Making Utility Subsidies Tax‑Free for Homeowners

Overview
The Water Conservation Rebate Tax Parity Act expands the Internal Revenue Code’s exclusion of conservation subsidies to cover water‑related measures. It allows rebates or subsidies from public utilities, storm‑water providers, and state or local governments for installing or upgrading water‑conservation, storm‑water‑management, or wastewater‑management systems to be excluded from taxable income. The bill was introduced in the Senate, read twice, and referred to the Committee on Finance.

The Act clarifies definitions for “water conservation or efficiency measure,” “storm‑water management measure,” and “wastewater management measure,” and it broadens the scope of who can provide these subsidies—adding public utilities and storm‑water providers to the list of eligible entities. By extending the tax‑exclusion to these new categories, the legislation encourages homeowners to adopt water‑saving technologies and infrastructure improvements without facing additional tax burdens.

Effective after December 31, 2021, the Act applies to subsidies received on or after that date, while explicitly stating that it does not retroactively alter the tax treatment of earlier subsidies. The bill aims to promote sustainable water use, reduce municipal water and wastewater costs, and support broader environmental and climate‑resilience goals.

Key Elements

• Expansion of IRC §136 Exclusion – Adds water‑conservation, storm‑water‑management, and wastewater‑management subsidies to the list of tax‑exempt conservation subsidies.
• New Definitions – Provides clear definitions for water‑conservation, storm‑water‑management, and wastewater‑management measures, focusing on residential applications.
• Eligible Providers – Includes public utilities (electricity, natural gas, or water), storm‑water management providers, and state or local governments as sources of eligible subsidies.
• Effective Date – Applies to subsidies received after December 31, 2021; no retroactive effect on subsidies received before January 1, 2022.
• No Inference Clause – Explicitly states that the Act does not create any inference about the tax treatment of earlier subsidies.
• Alignment with Environmental Goals – Encourages adoption of water‑efficiency technologies, reducing overall water consumption and supporting climate‑resilience initiatives.

Fueling the Future: A New Era for Ethanol, Small Refineries, and Clean Air

Overview

The Nationwide Consumer and Fuel Retailer Choice Act of 2025 (H.R. 1346) seeks to modernize the Clean Air Act’s treatment of ethanol blends and small refining operations. By revising the ethanol waiver and Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) limits, the bill expands the range of gasoline‑ethanol blends that can be sold nationwide, while tightening RVP requirements to protect air quality during high‑ozone periods.

The legislation also redefines “small refining company” to include a broader set of corporate structures and sets a production threshold of 75,000 barrels per day. From 2028 onward, small refineries will receive a 75 % reduction in compliance obligations, but only if they remain below that threshold. Petitions for exemption or extension of compliance will be capped and terminated after 2027, ensuring a clear, predictable regulatory environment.

Finally, the Act mandates a new EPA rule within 18 months to update fuel dispenser labeling and underground storage tank standards for blends containing 10–15 % ethanol. It also creates a pathway for at‑risk small refineries to petition for temporary exemptions, subject to strict documentation and public disclosure, and imposes a renewable‑fuel volume cap to balance industry flexibility with national renewable‑fuel goals.

Key Elements

• Ethanol Waiver & RVP Adjustments

  • Expands permissible ethanol blends to 10–15 % denatured anhydrous ethanol.
    
  • Tightens RVP limits during high‑ozone seasons to mitigate ozone‑forming emissions.
    

• Redefined Small Refining Company

  • Includes parent, subsidiary, and joint‑venture structures.
    
  • Production cap set at 75,000 barrels/day (calendar 2025).
    

• Compliance Relief for Small Refineries

  • 75 % reduction in compliance requirements starting 2028.
    
  • Exemptions cease if production exceeds the cap in any subsequent year.
    

• Petition and Exemption Rules

  • Petitions for extensions of exemptions terminated after 2027.
    
  • At‑risk small refineries may petition for temporary exemptions (2028 onward) with public disclosure and a 90‑day decision window.
    

• Credit Management

  • Credits from 2016–2018 compliance years returned to or credited against small refineries’ future obligations.
    

• Prohibition on Reallocation

  • Renewable fuel obligations reduced for small refineries cannot be reallocated to other entities.
    

• Infrastructure Rulemaking

  • EPA to finalize labeling and tank compatibility rules for 10–15 % ethanol blends within 18 months.
    

• Renewable‑Fuel Volume Cap

  • Exempted volumes limited to the energy content of 150 million gallons of conventional biofuel (2028) and adjusted annually thereafter.
    

These provisions collectively aim to balance environmental protection with economic flexibility for the ethanol and refining sectors, while ensuring that fuel infrastructure and renewable‑fuel targets remain aligned with national climate goals.

Alaska’s Oil‑Gas Permitting Overhaul: BLM Plans Streamlined Production Site Rules

Overview
The U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has announced its intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for a proposed rule that would streamline the permitting of oil‑ and gas‑production sites and associated rights‑of‑way in the National Petroleum Reserve‑Alaska (NPR‑A). The rule would establish pre‑defined, criteria‑based standards for common, repeatable infrastructure projects—such as gravel pads, access roads, pipelines, and support facilities—so that projects meeting these standards receive expedited approval. This effort follows a petition from the Alaska Oil and Gas Association and aligns with federal energy policy directives that emphasize reducing permitting delays on federal lands.

The NPR‑A spans roughly 23 million acres on Alaska’s North Slope and has historically been managed primarily for oil and gas development under the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act (NPRPA). While the area remains largely undeveloped, recent projects (e.g., Willow, Greater Moose’s Tooth) have highlighted the need for a more predictable regulatory framework. The BLM’s proposed rule would replace the current piecemeal, project‑by‑project NEPA process with an areawide approach that builds on existing environmental analyses, thereby reducing duplication and accelerating development while still protecting wildlife, subsistence resources, and cultural sites.

The EIS will evaluate the environmental consequences of the rule itself and of alternative permitting structures, considering impacts on subsistence activities, wildlife (including caribou, polar bears, and migratory birds), surface water, wetlands, permafrost, air quality, noise, cultural resources, and local economies. Public scoping is open until July 6, 2026, and the final rule and accompanying EIS are expected by late 2026 or early 2027.

Key Elements

• Criteria‑Based Permitting Framework – Establishes uniform standards for qualifying production sites to trigger streamlined approvals.
  
• Rulemaking Process – Amends 43 CFR part 3160 to codify the new permitting regime.
  
• Environmental Review – EIS will assess impacts on subsistence resources, wildlife, water, permafrost, air, noise, cultural sites, and socioeconomic conditions.
  
• Public Participation – 45‑day scoping period (until July 6, 2026) for comments on scope, alternatives, and relevant studies.
  
• Timeline – Final EIS and rule anticipated late 2026/early 2027.
  
• Alignment with Federal Policy – Supports Executive Orders 14153 and 14154, emphasizing efficient resource development in Alaska.
  
• Stakeholder Engagement – Coordination with Alaska Native Tribes, corporations, and other federal, state, and local agencies under NEPA and related statutes.
  
• Avoiding Duplication – Builds on prior EISs (e.g., 2020 Integrated Activity Plan, 2023 Willow Master Development Plan) to reduce repetitive analyses.
  
• Regulatory Context – Operates under the NPRPA, FLPMA, Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, and National Historic Preservation Act.

DOE Declares Utah Uranium Repository a Strictly Off‑Limits Zone, Making Trespassing a Federal Crime

Overview
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has officially designated the Crescent Junction Uranium Mill Tailings Repository in Grand County, Utah, as an off‑limits area. Under the Atomic Energy Act and related federal regulations, unauthorized entry into this site is now a federal crime, with penalties ranging from fines to imprisonment. The notice clarifies that the property is protected from both human intrusion and the introduction of weapons or hazardous materials.

The repository covers roughly 936 acres north of Interstate 70, about three miles west of Thompson Springs. The legal description specifies the exact boundaries, excluding certain sections of the surrounding land. DOE will post clear signage at all entrances and along the perimeter to inform the public of the restrictions and potential penalties.

Penalties differ depending on whether the area is enclosed. For fenced or otherwise bounded zones, violations can lead to fines up to $100,000 and up to one year in prison. For open areas, the fine is capped at $5,000. The notice also provides contact information for the DOE’s Lead Security Specialist and outlines the administrative process for the document’s publication.

Key Elements

• Legal Basis: Section 229 of the Atomic Energy Act (42 U.S.C. 2278a), 10 CFR part 860, Energy Reorganization Act, and DOE Organization Act.
  
• Location & Size: 936 acres in Grand County, Utah, north of I‑70, ~3 mi west of Thompson Springs.
  
• Boundary Description: Detailed legal description of the property, excluding specific sections of surrounding land.
  
• Off‑Limits Designation: Unauthorized entry or introduction of weapons/dangerous materials is prohibited.
  
• Penalties:
  
  • Enclosed areas: fine up to $100,000, up to 1 year imprisonment, or both.
    
  • Open areas: fine up to $5,000.
    
• Signage Requirements: Notices of prohibitions and penalties posted at all entrances and along the perimeter per 10 CFR 860.6.
  
• Contact: Ryan Johnson, Lead Security Specialist, DOE Environmental Management Consolidated Business Center, (513) 446‑1162.
  
• Administrative Authority: Signed by Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management, Timothy J. Walsh, and submitted by Federal Register Liaison Officer, Treena V. Garrett.

Hydroelectric Power Players Seek Approval for New Headwater Benefits Agreement in the Columbia‑Willamette Basin

Overview

The U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has opened a public comment period on a proposed Headwater Benefits Agreement (HBA) that involves several major hydroelectric utilities and municipalities across Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and Montana. The agreement, filed under docket numbers HB02‑26‑1‑000 and HB12‑26‑2‑000, covers a portfolio of 12 existing projects—including the Rock Island, Priest Rapids, and Willamette Falls plants—located in the Columbia and Willamette River basins. The HBA is intended to streamline the calculation and payment of headwater benefits charges, which compensate downstream users for the ecological and water‑resource impacts of upstream hydroelectric operations.

The agreement will be effective for up to five years, beginning August 1 2026, and serves as an extension of a 1997 Pacific Northwest Coordination Agreement. Its purpose is to give the parties additional time to negotiate a long‑term settlement that balances the energy needs of the region with the protection of downstream water quality, fish habitat, and recreational values. The settlement is required by FERC’s 18 CFR 11.14(a) and must be approved by the Commission before it can take effect.

Stakeholders—including Energy Keepers, Inc., NorthWestern, Avista, the City of Seattle, and Portland General Electric—invite public participation. Comments, protests, and motions to intervene must be filed electronically by June 15 2026, 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time. The Commission encourages electronic submissions via its eFiling system, but paper filings are also accepted. All intervenors must serve copies of their filings to the parties listed in the official service list and, if applicable, to the relevant resource agency.

Key Elements

• Parties Involved: Energy Keepers, Inc.; Public Utility Districts of Chelan, Pend Oreille, Grant, and Douglas counties; NorthWestern Corp.; Avista Corp.; City of Seattle; Portland General Electric; Eugene Water & Electric Board.
• Projects Covered: 12 hydroelectric facilities (e.g., Rock Island, Priest Rapids, Willamette Falls) in the Columbia and Willamette River basins.
• Agreement Duration: Up to five years, effective August 1 2026, extending a 1997 Pacific Northwest Coordination Agreement.
• Regulatory Basis: FERC’s Federal Power Act, 18 CFR 11.14(a) (headwater benefits calculation) and 18 CFR 385.602 (settlement filing requirements).
• Public Participation: Comment, protest, and motion‑to‑intervene deadlines set for June 15 2026; electronic filing encouraged; paper filings accepted.
• Service Requirements: Intervenors must serve copies to all parties on the official service list and, if relevant, to the responsible resource agency.
• Purpose of HBA: Provide additional time for parties to negotiate a long‑term arrangement that balances hydroelectric generation with downstream ecological and water‑resource protection.

Coral Reefs Get a New Environmental Review: NOAA Seeks Public Input on Expanded Conservation Efforts

Overview
The U.S. Department of Commerce’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has announced its intent to prepare a supplemental Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for the Coral Reef Conservation Program (CRCP). The original PEIS, issued in 2020, evaluated the environmental impacts of NOAA‑funded coral reef conservation and restoration activities. Advances in science, new restoration techniques, and changing ocean conditions now warrant a fresh assessment of the program’s expanded scope.

The supplemental PEIS will examine a range of new and enhanced actions, including larger restoration sites, ex‑situ coral nurseries, assisted gene flow, and innovative reef‑health interventions such as herbivore releases and sound‑based larval settlement. NOAA will also consider measures to protect corals during thermal events and disease outbreaks, and broaden watershed restoration to include mangrove nurseries. The review will follow the tiered decision‑making framework established in the original PEIS, ensuring compliance with NEPA and other environmental statutes.

NOAA is inviting written comments from the public, state and local agencies, and other stakeholders by June 18, 2026. The scoping process aims to identify significant environmental impacts, eliminate redundant issues, and coordinate with related environmental reviews. The agency’s preferred alternative—continuing the CRCP with the new actions—will be evaluated against no‑action and other program‑level alternatives.

Key Elements

• Expanded Conservation Actions

  • Whole‑colony coral collection for research, nursery stock, disease rescue, and gene banks.
    
  • Larger restoration areas (≈1,000 m²) with selectively bred or preconditioned corals.
    
  • Enhanced nursery support, including land‑based nurseries and herbivore co‑culturing.
    
  • Ecosystem interventions: herbivore releases, invasive species control, and sound‑based larval settlement.
    
  • Temporary coral evacuation and shading during thermal events or disease outbreaks.
    
  • In‑situ mangrove nursery operations and watershed restoration.

• Program‑Level Alternatives

  1. No‑Action – status quo without new activities.
     
  2. Limited Restoration – continue CRCP but eliminate in‑water restoration and debris removal.
     
  3. Full Restoration with Mitigation – maintain current operations plus new actions and discretionary mitigation measures.
     
  4. Preferred – status quo plus all new expanded methods (current CRCP plus enhancements).

• Public Participation

  • Comments due by June 18, 2026.
    
  • Submission via NOAA’s online portal or by mail to Liz Fairey, Office of Habitat Conservation.
    
  • Anonymous comments accepted; personal data will be publicly accessible.

• Compliance and Coordination

  • Supplemental PEIS will adhere to NEPA and NOAA’s internal NEPA policies.
    
  • Tiered environmental review will assess site‑specific impacts within the broader program framework.
    
  • Coordination with federal, state, local, private conservation groups, and academic institutions.

• Strategic Context

  • Aligns with the National Coral Reef Resilience Strategy and the Coral Reef Conservation Act.
    
  • Addresses emerging threats such as coral disease, invasive species, and climate‑induced thermal stress.
    
  • Aims to enhance reef resilience while safeguarding ecosystem functions and supporting local communities.

DOE Opens $5.1 Million to Pay for Clean‑Up at Uranium & Thorium Sites

Overview

The Department of Energy (DOE) has announced that it will accept reimbursement claims from licensees operating uranium and thorium processing facilities for the fiscal year 2026. Under Title X of the Energy Policy Act of 1992, the DOE’s Office of Environmental Management has made $5.115 million available to cover costs associated with decontamination, decommissioning, reclamation, and other remedial actions required to comply with federal and state regulations. The program is designed to help licensees recover expenses incurred while cleaning up byproduct material generated during the production of uranium or thorium for the U.S. government.

Claims must be submitted by July 1, 2026, and will be reviewed for eligibility. If the total approved claims exceed the available funds, reimbursements will be paid on a prorated basis. All payments are contingent on the availability of congressional appropriations and must adhere to the Anti‑Deficiency Act. Eligible costs include work necessary to meet the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 or state‑mandated requirements under the Atomic Energy Act.

The funding for these reimbursements comes from the Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund established by the Treasury, ensuring that licensees have a clear, federally backed source of financial support for remedial activities at active processing sites.

Key Elements

• Funding amount: $5.115 million allocated for FY 2026 Title X reimbursement program.
  
• Claim deadline: July 1, 2026.
  
• Prorated payments: If approved claims exceed available funds, reimbursements will be proportionally reduced.
  
• Eligible costs: Decontamination, decommissioning, reclamation, and other remedial actions required to comply with the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTCRA) or state agreements under the Atomic Energy Act.
  
• Documentation: Claims must be supported by reasonable documentation as defined in 10 CFR part 765.
  
• Submission: Mail two copies to Mary Young, Office of Legacy Management, Grand Junction, Colorado, or submit electronically.
  
• Contact: Amie Robinson, Title X Program Lead, (240) 243‑5550 or email.
  
• Funding source: Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund (Treasury).
  
• Legal framework: Title X of the Energy Policy Act of 1992, 10 CFR part 765, and the Anti‑Deficiency Act.

Idaho Hydroelectric Upgrade Opens Door for Public Input

Overview

Secesh United, LLC has filed an amendment to its conduit exemption for the Zena Creek Ranch Hydroelectric Project in Valley County, Idaho. The amendment seeks to replace the existing penstock, install a new powerhouse with two 1,500‑watt turbines, and connect the system to a 6‑inch water supply pipeline and irrigation pipeline. The changes are intended to modernize the company’s irrigation infrastructure while maintaining the hydroelectric generation capacity of roughly 2 MWh per year.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has accepted the application and is inviting federal, state, local, and tribal agencies with environmental expertise to cooperate on any required environmental documentation. Because the project is small, the usual 60‑day comment period has been shortened to 30 days, with a final deadline of June 15, 2026. Comments, protests, and motions to intervene may be filed electronically or by paper, and all submissions must be served to the parties listed in the project’s service list.

This notice provides an opportunity for stakeholders—including environmental groups, water‑resource managers, and local residents—to review the proposed upgrades, assess potential impacts on water flow, habitat, and irrigation, and submit their views before FERC makes a decision on the conduit exemption amendment.

Key Elements

• Project: Zena Creek Ranch Hydroelectric Project, Valley County, Idaho
  
• Applicant: Secesh United, LLC
  
• Conduit Exemption Amendment: Project No. 10939‑003, filed April 14, 2025, supplemented March 10, 2026
  
• Proposed Modifications
  
  • Replacement of existing penstock
    
  • New 6‑ft × 12‑ft powerhouse with two 1,500‑W Scott Hydro turbines (≈ 2 MWh/yr)
    
  • Connection to a 6‑inch water supply pipeline and irrigation pipeline
    
  • Tailrace integration with existing tailrace
    
• Regulatory Basis: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a‑825r
  
• Public Comment Period: 30 days from notice issuance; deadline June 15, 2026, 5:00 p.m. ET
  
• Filing Instructions: Electronic filing via FERC eFiling or eComment; paper filings accepted at specified addresses; all documents must include docket number P‑10939‑003
  
• Intervention Rules: Only parties filing a motion to intervene may become intervenors; cooperating agencies cannot intervene
  
• Agency Participation: Federal, state, local, and tribal agencies with environmental expertise may cooperate on environmental documentation but cannot intervene
  
• Contact Information: James B. Adkins (Yellowpine, ID) and Selina Sumi (contact numbers provided) for project inquiries; FERC Online Support for filing assistance
  
• Accessibility: Application available on FERC’s eLibrary; parties may register for email notifications of related filings.

FEMA Pulls Back Flood Hazard Update for Gaston County, NC

Overview

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has officially withdrawn its proposed flood hazard determinations for Gaston County, North Carolina, and its incorporated areas. The original proposal, issued in October 2025, would have updated flood maps—including base flood elevations, depths, and Special Flood Hazard Area boundaries—affecting insurance rates and building regulations. However, the county’s need for a revised flood map has halted the current mapping effort.

This withdrawal means that no new flood hazard information will be released for Gaston County at this time. FEMA has indicated that it will issue a new Notice of Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations once the revised map is ready, followed by local newspaper coverage to inform residents and stakeholders.

The decision underscores the importance of accurate, up‑to‑date flood data for effective risk management and insurance pricing. Stakeholders—including homeowners, developers, and local officials—will need to await the forthcoming notice before any changes to flood insurance requirements or building codes are enacted.

Key Elements

• Withdrawal Effective: May 19, 2026 – the proposed flood hazard determinations are no longer pending.
• Reason: Gaston County requires a revised flood map before proceeding with the mapping process.
• Future Action: FEMA plans to publish a new Notice of Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations and local newspaper coverage once the revised map is available.
• Contact: Comments and inquiries can be directed to David N. Bascom, Acting Director, Engineering and Modeling Division, National Flood Insurance Program, FEMA.
• Regulatory Basis: The action is authorized under 42 U.S.C. 4104 and 44 CFR 67.4.

NFIP Adjusts 2027 Subsidy Start Date to December Amid Funding Gap

Overview