5333 private links
The National Fire Protection Association found that four-fifths of cooking fires involve electric stoves. They correlated with significantly inflated rates of reported fires (2.6 times higher than gas stoves), civilian fire death rates (3.4 times higher), civilian fire injury rates (4.8 times higher), and average fire dollar loss (3.8 times higher). //
A proposed DOE standard, published in May, would require dishwashers to use significantly less water and power. Moreover, federal regulations have, historically, skyrocketed average cycle times, driving consumers to choose the far less water-efficient practice of handwashing dishes.
Chuck Schumer @SenSchumer
·
This MAGA Supreme Court is continuing to erode our country’s environmental laws.
Make no mistake—this ruling will mean more polluted water, and more destruction of wetlands.
We’ll keep fighting to protect our waters.
The Washington Post @washingtonpost
Breaking news: The Supreme Court on Thursday cut back the power of the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate the nation’s wetlands and waterways, another setback for the agency’s authority to combat pollution. https://wapo.st/3q9g6Nx
Readers added context
All 9 judges agreed that the EPA overstepped its authority and that the plaintiffs' property should not be subject to EPA regulation. However, 4 judges disagreed with the majority's opinion on the limits of EPA authority with respect to wetlands.
nytimes.com/2023/05/25/us/…
12:02 PM · May 25, 2023
More than a year before a shocking collapse that led to a near-crisis in the financial sector, Silicon Valley Bank was the subject of an investigation set in motion by the Federal Reserve in San Francisco, according to a new report.
Bloomberg is reporting today that the investigative team, made up of senior examiners for the Fed, was tasked with assessing the firm and its potential risks. What they found, it seems, should have been enough to get regulators involved long before the bank collapsed and sent shockwaves through the tech and financial sector – and long before taxpayer bailouts became an option.
According to Bloomberg, those investigators “fired off a series of formal warnings to the bank’s leaders, pressing them to fix serious weaknesses in operations and technology, according to people with knowledge of the matter.” //
In a twist, the San Francisco Fed’s deputy point person in charge of monitoring the bank until late 2021 received a new assignment afterward, becoming the regulator’s point person on Silvergate Capital Corp., according to people with knowledge of the situation. Silvergate also shut this month because of similar flaws in its deposit base and the positioning of its balance sheet. //
As the Democrats call for more regulation of the banking industry, this report highlights a familiar problem – namely, that the regulations and safeguards already in place don’t appear to be working.
Michael Shellenberger
@ShellenbergerMD
·
Follow
Replying to @ShellenbergerMD
FTX's plans were shocking in their ambition. It sought to radically alter the regulation of all commodities, not just crypto or finance, in ways that would benefit FTX. And it came very close to doing so.
As multiple advanced reactor vendors enter the licensing process to build first-of-a-kind demonstration projects, the Nuclear Innovation Alliance (NIA)—a nonprofit “think-and-do tank” that supports the nuclear power industry—has said issues with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC’s) current user fee cost-recovery model could slow innovation.
In a report released on May 19, the NIA identified how the NRC’s fee model can inhibit advanced nuclear innovation, compared the current model to structures used in other industries and countries, and recommended changes to improve the system. Importantly, the group says reliance on applicant fees limits the ability of the NRC to hire and train staff ahead of expected applications, reducing regulatory efficiency.
Smaller Firms with Less Resources
“We’re at an inflection point with the nuclear industry in the U.S., as well as nuclear regulation,” Alex Gilbert, project manager with NIA, said during an online panel session held to roll out the report. “We’re really moving away from the large, conventional light-water reactors that dominated our initial 40, 50 years of the nuclear industry in the U.S. We’re looking at advanced reactor technologies. We’re looking at new advanced light-water technologies—other non-light-water technologies, and we have a regulatory framework that we’re currently in the process of transforming to adapt to these new technologies.”
According to Gilbert, nuclear reactor development has historically been dominated by a handful of large, multinational corporations. For them, the cost of regulatory fees may not have been a significant financial barrier. But today, many smaller, less-established companies are working to develop new designs, and money is sometimes scarce.
“When we’re looking at the industry that we’re trying to develop, we’re trying to look towards a very vibrant, very competitive future. And so, we need to think about how our regulatory system is impacting new entrants,” Gilbert said. //
Gilbert explained that there are basically two elements to the NRC’s current fee structure. The first is 10 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) Part 170 fees. These are hourly fees that are charged to applicants when they’re getting a specific item or regulatory engagement of value.
“The easiest way to think about that—and the thing that we focused on—is if you’re trying to get a license at the NRC to build and operate a nuclear facility, that’s something that there’s a discrete value and you’re charged hourly fees. Those hourly fees are actually just under $300 per hour, so that can add up pretty quickly,” said Gilbert.
The second element of the current fee structure is 10 CFR Part 171 fees. These are annual fees paid by existing licensees. These fees actually provide the majority of the funding for the NRC. Although these fees are obviously very important, Gilbert said NIA focused on the Part 170 fees because the group was most interested in understanding how fees affect innovation.
Notably, the report says the NRC’s budget has declined by more than 30% since the mid-2010s due to plant retirements and reduced application activity. This has been accompanied by a 25% reduction in NRC staff. While the existing fleet may be shrinking, indicating a lesser need for NRC staff, the growing pipeline of advanced reactors and the potential obligation for NRC design reviews would signal more staff may be required.
“What we’re concerned about with that kind of efficiency question is getting the right resources for the right project at the right time,” Gilbert said. //
The NIA reviewed fee structures for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to better understand how they were funded. Gilbert felt the FAA and FDA were particularly noteworthy. “These are really interesting regulatory agencies, because they’re very similar to the NRC in that they’re regulating innovative activities,” he said.
In the case of the FAA, even though most of the agency is funded by user fees, those user fees are collected exclusively from economic activities, such as ticket sales. “They’re not charging fees for their review of what’s called a type certification, which is similar to what the NRC does for a reactor license. So, you’re not having that disincentive to innovation,” said Gilbert.
The FDA operates a little bit differently. “They’ve had to actually substantially grow their overall budget over time,” Gilbert explained. “In implementing user fees there, it was really effective when combined with public investment by being able to balance both public and private interests in the funding of the agency. And that’s one of the reasons, among several others, that FDA is considered to have a relatively efficient and effective regulatory review system.”
Meanwhile, the EPA, which regulates many of the nuclear power industry’s competitors, such as coal, gas, and biomass power plants, only requires a small portion of its costs to be covered by fees. “They’re really minor compared to nuclear license fees,” said Gilbert. “So, the way that this fee system has worked out across the federal agency is actually disincentivizing the nuclear industry and kind of raising a roadblock that our competitors are not facing.” //
In its report, the NIA recommended a number of changes to the NRC fee structure, which it felt would spur innovation. For example, it proposed excluding or substantially reducing fees for new license applicants. The report says: “Multiple aspects of U.S. nuclear regulation bring benefits to the public and entities rather than just the applicant. Reduced fees, especially for new designs and innovative technologies, can reflect these broad benefits. Increasing the fraction of the NRC’s budget that is funded from general revenues can incentivize more innovation, improve regulatory efficiency, and ensure the American regulatory environment remains competitive.” Alternatively, NIA said if licensing fees could not be completely replaced, then excluding fees for items such as pre-application, topical reports, and environmental reviews could still bring substantial benefits. //
Peter Hastings, vice president of Regulatory Affairs and Quality with Kairos Power, agreed. “I think some amount of fee could be an effective barrier to that kind of frivolity. She used the term ‘skin in the game,’ and that certainly makes sense—to not necessarily reduce the hourly fee to nothing, but perhaps put in some sort of cost-share that would reduce the overall cost but still require the applicant to demonstrate that they’re serious, even if it’s only through a financial obligation,” he said.
“Any time that you put a cost on something, like a carbon tax, you discourage it,” said Gilbert. “In the case of these hourly fees, you’re essentially charging for innovation. And so, if we’re trying to build a new generation of safer, more economic reactors that can really help restore American competitiveness, we’re kind of creating a regulatory barrier right now to that innovation.”
Musk went on to say that the government should act as a referee and not a player on the field, adding that government should just get out of the way and not impede progress. Moreover, the rules and regulations they impart don’t just go away, making it harder for nations to advance.
Many of these rules stagnate as the situations around their creation change, making getting rid of them important according to Musk.
“Rules and regulations are immortal,” he said. “They don’t die. The vast majority of rules and regulations live forever… there’s not really an effective garbage collection system for removing rules and regulations, so this hardens the arteries of civilization where you are able to do less and less over time.” //
Musk was asked about whether or not he supports the subsidies being thrown toward electric vehicles.
“We don’t. So there’s no need for supporting a charging network. I would delete it. Delete. I’m literally saying get rid of all subsidies. I’m literally saying get rid of all subsidies,” he said.
210.8 Ground-Fault Circuit-Interrupter Protection for Personnel. ...(F) Outdoor Outlets. All outdoor outlets for dwellings, other than those covered in 210.8(A)(3), Exception to (3), that are supplied by single-phase branch circuits rated 150V to ground or less, 50A or less, shall have ground-fault circuit-interrupter protection for personnel. This requirement shall become effective January 1, 2023, for heating/ventilating/air-conditioning (HVAC) equipment.
Substantiation: GFCI protection was expanded in the 2020 NEC without HVAC component and equipment safety standards being harmonized with GFCI amperage limits. Currently, the UL standard that HVAC equipment is listed to (UL 1995) has no requirements for leakage current if the unit is hard wired, as most residential air conditioners/heat pumps are. In the future, HVAC equipment will be listed to UL 60335-2-40, which sets a limit of 10 milliamps of leakage current. However, this new standard is not mandatory until 1/1/2024. UL 943 is the standard to which GFCI breakers are listed and are required to trip at 5 milliamps of current. Even if HVAC equipment is listed to the UL 60335-2-40 standard, there is no guarantee it will be compatible with UL listed GFCI breakers This lack of coordination is what is leading to the nuisance tripping that customers are dealing with.
Until both equipment and component standards are updated, designers, installers, AHJs, and consumers are forced to choose between an NEC 2020 compliant installation or an operational installation. In jurisdictions that have adopted 2020 NEC with 210.8(F) intact, there have been numerous instances of field tripping of the GFCI breaker on ductless mini splits, units containing power conversion equipment, and on many single-stage units.
How the FAA is Working to Reduce the Impact of Aircraft Noise
By Tom Hoffmann, FAA Safety Briefing Managing Editor
In a scathing response, Jack Pelton called the new interpretation a “solution to a nonexistent problem.” //
Pelton concluded by writing, “This entire episode is a scary example of how new interpretations of the regulations can upend the entire community. While this short-term fix allows operations to continue, it never should have come to this point. Creating more than 30,000 new LODAs and exemptions is a paperwork exercise that does nothing to advance safety.”
‘How is it that despite 100 years of engineering advances, the same project now took five times as long? Did we just forget how to build things?’ //
Bridges, roads, and other modern infrastructure projects in the United States take exceptionally longer to complete compared to those in other nations. A new video from Kite and Key creators breaks down exactly why a combination of government regulations and bad management causes such lengthy delays in assembling the transportation and urban foundation of American cities.
The Golden Gate Bridge and Empire State building are just two examples of speedy and successful construction projects in the United States, the video begins, but now significantly smaller buildings, bridges, and other proposals are taking an abnormally long time to finish. //
“Better safety isn’t the reason that America is falling behind. After all, countries like Germany and Canada, build new infrastructure, much faster and cheaper than we do. And they do it without a body count,” the narrator explained.
In reality, it is a fatal combination of government regulation and bad management that is killing American infrastructure plans and creating decades of setbacks. The video shows how laws such as the National Environmental Policy Act were “well-intentioned” at the time of their creation yet ultimately fail to accomplish much but delaying new construction.
“Its goal was to make sure that new construction factored in environmental concerns … maybe it’s all worth it to protect the planet right? But here’s the craziest part: nothing about NEPA actually requires that. All you have to do is identify environmental issues. There’s nothing that forces you to actually do anything about them. In fact, in some cases, these regulations actually make us less green,” the narrator continued, noting examples such as in Montana, where the U.S. Forest Service delayed cutting back forests and a wildfire burned “nearly half the land” during the NEPA waiting period.
As the battle was in full swing in 2017, the FCC received over 22 million public comments for and against the repeal, but as it turns out, millions of those comments were not individual communications but spam blasts. A new report from the Attorney General of New York, Letitia James, has found that 7.7 million comments in support of net neutrality were generated by just one person, a 19-year-old college student.
And it wasn’t just the pro-net neutrality comments that were found to fraudulent. James’ investigation also discovered a “broadband industry group” spent a lot of money to generate nearly 8.5 million comments in favor of repealing the FCC policy. //
James‘ report generated some recommendations to shore up the public comment process for federal legislation, and (and this part is hilarious) verify the identity of commenters to make sure they come from real people and not spam programs.
The report also outlines recommendations to improve the transparency and accountability of FCC rulemaking proceedings, which allow the public to weigh in on draft proposals of regulation changes. For instance, it suggests mandating that lead generation vendors receive express, informed consent before submitting a public comment on someone’s behalf.
The New York AG report includes comments from people whose names were used without their permission. One expressed disgust “that somebody stole [their] identity and used it to push a viewpoint that [they] do not hold.” One 10-year-old boy’s name, address, and valid e-mail was used without his or his parents’ permission. One other victim may have summed it up best: “These are the kinds of actions that make the population lose faith in the system.”
Yes, you read that right. Democrats think verifying a voter’s identity is racist, but verifying a public comment is absolutely necessary so that people don’t “lose faith in the system.”
A bill that will create the largest licensing program in Denver passed in a unanimous vote at a city council meeting Monday night.
Rental property owners will now be required to have a license – the requirement goes into effect in a phasing process – multi-family rental property owners have until Jan. 1, 2023, to secure a license and single-family rental property owners have until Jan. 1, 2024.
So again, in Denver, I will be required to obtain a license to enter into a private agreement with another private individual on my own private property. //
. As is the case with many good-intentioned government regulations, its only forte is the impeccable construction quality of the road to hell. The per-unit increased cost of this atrocity for landlords is estimated to run from $50-$500. Of course, landlords will have challenges in passing that cost along to renters as the city will likely resort to rent control measures that prevent them from doing so. Unsurprisingly, government action increases costs.
The fallout from this action will likely lead to a significant sell-off of rental properties in the City of Denver, reducing rental availability. Anyone who can fog a mirror would know that the subsequent reduction in the supply of available rentals will ultimately increase the cost of the available properties. The city will then be forced to further impede on private property rights to “protect” “vulnerable” renters. Again, as is the case when it comes to government, the proposed solution to “problems” is inevitably a more restrictive government.
The county even regulates what meets the standard of a 'bonafide meal' each group of customers is required to buy if they would like to order beer. All this, we're told, fights COVID.
Unfortunately, there rarely seems to be any accountability for FAA incompetence. Did any heads roll for its lack of responsive oversight prior to the Collings crash? If so, I haven’t heard about it. This is managerial and cultural rot. If the organization has an overarching culture of individuals not owning problems and fixing them, nothing gets done.
What to do here? First, the NTSB is right to examine this issue, but is constrained in what it can do. To push the FAA into action would probably require congressional heat. But even that sometimes doesn’t yield results, since the agency is famous for ignoring congressional mandates with little accountability. It seems to me no new regulations are required. It’s reasonable to believe that if existing procedures had been followed, the Collings maintenance issues might have been identified and corrected, with the emphasis on might. It’s a better-than-nothing kind of thing. That applies to the Dillingham skydiving crash in Hawaii, too. Maintenance issues with the airplane were egregious and surveillance was nonexistent. Even cursory FAA inspections should have caught this. The FAA needs to do the basic job, never mind an enhanced one. //
I’d rather such a thing come from AOPA, USPA or EAA rather than the FAA. //
Ultimately, Part 91 flight safety depends much more on the judgment, skill and attitude of the pilot than does Part 121 or even 135 flying. In Part 91 flying, almost all the judgments are made in the cockpit without benefit of the overwatch of professional dispatchers, meteorologists and maintenance at the other end of a satellite phone or an ACARS message. We set it up that way. We want it that way. //
I believe the informed consent doctrine applies here. As I’ve reported before, this is how the FAA decided to oversee tourist spaceflight. Potential passengers are informed in detail that the vehicle is not certified and that they’re on their own for assuming the risk. In my view, it’s long past time to disabuse the public of the notion that Part 91 flying is “safe” and/or that the FAA can make it that way. The government can and should impose requirements to reduce risk in design and manufacturing of aircraft, maintenance and operations and adherence to regulations. That includes reasonable surveillance and enforcement. Reduced risk is not the same thing as safe.
So the answer to member Homendy’s question is no, there isn’t a practical way to anoint a Part 91 operation as “safe” because even enhanced surveillance—which the FAA has proven itself incapable of performing—is unlikely to deliver the public’s idea of flight safety, which is Delta Air Lines. Thumbs up to better surveillance and inspections and the FAA doing its basic job of assuring compliance and of enforcing against the really bad operators. We often know who they are ahead of any accident happening. But we should stop misleading the public that flight on Part 91 airplanes represents the same level of safety as airline flying. It does not.
"We have to stop making excuses." //
The program, which the Caller wrote required “producing and maintaining assessments of fair housing practices,” essentially “saddled HUD’s payroll with an estimated 64 additional employees, whose salaries cost American taxpayers up to $15 million a year.”
Sec. Carson told the publication, in part:
“In nearly every case, it is a fact that local governments are more adequately equipped to deal with their community’s unique needs than any unelected bureaucrat in Washington. //
The Daily Caller added that Sec. Carson hasn’t been shy about bulldozing his way through the mounds of unresolved Fair Housing cases left by the previous administration:
Carson has also cleared a significant backlog of Fair Housing complaints rolled over from the previous administration. Data provided to Daily Caller indicate that under Carson’s leadership, HUD has investigated and resolved 22,933 Fair Housing cases since January 2017. //
I certainly don’t have a problem with us helping people who are poor, people who find themselves in difficult circumstances. I don’t know if it needs to be based on race.
It needs to be based on circumstances.”
President hands his Cabinet secretaries broad say to nix more regulations //
Donald Trump, eager to juice the staggering US economy to boost his re-election bid, signed an executive order on Tuesday that he said is designed to help businesses recover from the Covid-19 outbreak.
The president told his Cabinet members during a White House meeting the order “gives you tremendous power to cut regulation”. //
The order is about “instructing federal agencies to use any and all authority to waive, suspend and eliminate unnecessary regulations that impede economic recovery,” Mr Trump said before signing it with a large black felt pen. //
And we want to leave it that way,” he added.
Mr Trump has made nixing regulations, especially ones put in place by the Obama administration, a top priority during his over three years in office.
The Trump administration and state and local governments are wisely suspending regulations to help fight the coronavirus. Many of these rules and regulations were not necessary in the first place, given their tendency to reduce innovation and access to care, not to mention their restriction on American liberty. Below is a list of suspended rules and regulations, starting with federal waivers, followed by state and local waivers.
Netflix and YouTube have announced that they would be reducing their quality of streaming in Europe to lessen the strain on the continent's internet capabilities during the coronavirus pandemic.
Sidney Longwell, a devoted family man and entrepreneur in the finest tradition of the American Frontier, passed away last month at age 81. A fighter to the last, he died after 38 years of waiting for justice in his lawsuit against the federal government.
It is hard to comprehend the brute force of the federal government until it has been turned against you personally, as it had been against Sidney. As an attorney for people like him, I see that force being used against good men and women every day.
Federal agencies have practically limitless resources to fight court battles, in both money and manpower. They have no competition, no shareholders to placate, and no one person who can be held personally responsible for their malfeasance. They also have the cruelest weapon of all — time.
Sidney purchased a Montana oil and gas lease from the federal government in 1982, passed a decade’s worth of rigorous environmental and archaeological reviews, and was all set to develop the land when government suspended his lease in 1993. He spent 38 years fighting a David-and-Goliath battle to use the leased mineral rights — a battle I’m still fighting as an attorney for his family.
Sidney’s passing reminds me that time really is the most devastating weapon the government has in its arsenal. We can give our clients resources, expertise, and a team of people to fight on their behalf, but sometimes they can’t outlast Uncle Sam. //
A favorable court ruling in 2016 seemed to promise a resolution. But, given 21 days to come up with a schedule to act, the government dug in its heels instead, abruptly cancelling the lease. Incredibly, the government’s lawyers justified the decision by inventing a procedural defect that contradicted what agency officials had told Sidney for 30 years.
Sidney’s case is just one of many examples of federal agencies weaponizing bureaucratic delay against American citizens. Rather than denying an application or permit that can be appealed, they simply refuse to finish processing the permit, leaving people like Sidney trapped. All the agency needs to do is wait for the person to run out of money or die. //
What happened to Sidney Longwell is a grave injustice, and one that is becoming too common. Another of my clients, Monte Ray — also in his 80s — is still awaiting a decision on mineral patents he applied for in 1991. Another client: small, family-owned, Colorado oil company WillSource Enterprise, has been fighting the federal government’s delay tactics in processing their permits since 1995.
More than ever, Americans are being governed, not by laws, but by regulations. These regulations are created and enforced by countless unelected and unaccountable officials who staff government agencies. //
em •
Do these unelected men and women who oversee federal agencies have too much power?
When Judge Brett Kavanaugh was a circuit court judge, he wrote;
"The independent agencies collectively constitute, in effect, a headless fourth branch of the U.S. Government. They exercise enormous power over the economic and social life of the United States."
Because of their massive power and the absence of Presidential supervision and direction, independent agencies pose a significant threat to individual liberty and to the constitutional system of separation of powers and checks and balances."
Vito em • 3 hours ago
Too much power. Too much staff. Too much money. Not enough meaningful work.
A poisonous combination.
While I'm Here... • 5 hours ago
Government bureaucracies are full of petty, amoral people who live for their sadistic games of Calvinball.
Other countries are far more open about their bribery culture, and I think that's an element which we often forget to include, when we talk about government harassment. I think they usually end up getting paid off.
1942Larry • 44 minutes ago
Every bill Congress passes grants the bureaucrats the authority to write regulations as necessary to implement it. In other words, Congress says bureaucrats can add to the bill as necessary to make up for anything we were too careless to include. That is truly crazy and lazy.
Most provisions of the American Energy Innovation Act wouldn't spur American energy innovation. Nor is the bill innovative in promoting sound public policy. //
if you’re in Washington, “innovation” is trotting out the same, stale approaches to policy that have done less to empower innovators and families and more to empower special interests.
The latest case in point is a 555-page energy bill introduced in the Senate. The majority of provisions in the so-called American Energy Innovation Act are not something that would spur American energy innovation, nor is it innovative thinking when it comes to promoting sound public policy. //
These interventionist policies put Congress and Department of Energy bureaucrats—rather than investors and customers—in the position of narrowing the field of competition between the many energy technologies being perfected in the U.S. right now to win customers. That cannot help but narrow the scope of innovation. //
The market for energy, whether it’s to light and heat our homes or to get to work every day, is a massive one. In the U.S. alone, consumers spent over $1 trillion on energy, and global investment reached $1.8 trillion.
Any of these technologies that can capture a sliver of that market won’t need the taxpayers’ help. Rather than propping up a few projects, if Congress wants American energy companies to innovate more, it should break down government-imposed barriers that prevent them from doing so //
Congress needs to put forth an energy bill, but one that does exactly the opposite of the American Energy Innovation Act.
Congress should undo the policies that have entangled the federal government in the business of energy and the decisions of families to make choices for themselves about what services and technologies best meet their needs.