Tag Archives: EPA

Over 20 States Take Legal Action Against EPA for Solar Subsidy Revocation

Posted on by
Reply

Over 20 states have filed a lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), contesting the agency’s decision to terminate a $7 billion initiative designed to enhance access to solar power for low-income households.

The initiative, known as “Solar For All,” was launched in 2022 as part of the Inflation Reduction Act, which allocated subsidies for building rooftop and community solar projects. This action was part of the Biden administration’s commitment to decreasing carbon emissions and aimed to make solar energy available to around 1 million additional American households.

However, in August, the EPA announced the program’s cancellation, with states withdrawing approximately 90% of the grant funds from the awarded accounts, according to the legal complaint.

The EPA has been working to reinstate clean energy funding sanctioned by the Biden administration. This new lawsuit will assess whether the agency overstepped its bounds in this instance. The states involved in the legal challenge had expected the funding to boost solar power availability, lower greenhouse gas emissions from energy production, and decrease energy costs.

“Congress established a solar energy program to make electricity more affordable, but the administration is ignoring the law, focusing instead on conspiracy theories about climate change,” Washington Attorney General Nick Brown stated in a news release. The EPA’s action “places about $156 million in jeopardy” for Washington state, as mentioned in the release.

Earlier this month, a coalition of nonprofit organizations and solar installers lodged a complaint, which resembles a similar lawsuit against the program’s cancellation.

When asked about the recent lawsuit, the White House referred NBC News to the EPA, which typically remains silent on ongoing litigation.

The states involved in the lawsuits are all governed by Democratic officials. Notably, Washington, Arizona, and Minnesota are leading this legal action, which was filed in the Western District of Washington.

The lawsuit contends that the EPA “illegally and unilaterally terminated” the program, breaching the Administrative Procedure Act that regulates federal agencies’ operations. It also claims that the EPA overstepped its “constitutional authority” by attempting to revoke programs and funds approved by Congress.

This latest suit is part of a dual strategy employed by states to counteract the Trump administration’s cuts to clean energy initiatives established under President Joe Biden.

On Wednesday, another group, including states and state energy agencies, filed a separate complaint in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims regarding the cancellation of individual subsidy agreements.

The lawsuit argues that the EPA’s retraction of funds violated distinct subsidy contracts with states and state energy authorities.

It further claims the EPA relied on a “false and malicious interpretation” of the One Big Beautiful Bill, which was enacted during the Trump administration, to support its actions.

While acknowledging that the law granted the administration certain powers to retract Inflation Control Act funds, the complaint asserts that this authority only extended to funds not yet distributed to grant recipients.

A third lawsuit was filed this month in Rhode Island District Court. Solar companies, homeowners, nonprofits, and labor unions are making similar claims. It contends that the EPA’s actions could deny nearly 1 million people access to affordable solar energy and jeopardize “hundreds of thousands of good-paying, high-quality jobs.”

Source: www.nbcnews.com

EPA Leaders Pledge “Complete Transparency” on Geoengineering Amidst Ongoing Weather Conspiracy Theories

Posted on by
Reply

The individual in green is R-Tenn. He mentioned that Sen. Tim Burchett is a co-sponsor of the initiative. The barchet is spreading equally perplexing assertions regarding severe weather.

A spokesman for Greene stated that lawmakers have been “discussing this matter for quite some time” and asserted that the bill is unrelated to the floods in Texas.

In a follow-up email, Greene communicated with Zeldin and expressed encouragement over his actions.

“This is an uncontrolled experiment conducted in the atmosphere without consent. It’s reckless, dangerous, and must be halted,” she stated in an email.

Burchett’s office did not immediately respond to inquiries for comment.

Following Milton and Helen, NOAA issued a factsheet in October 2024, aiming to debunk “weather modification claims” that emerged after two storms impacted Florida and North Carolina. The agency declared it would not “fund or engage in cloud seeding or any weather modification projects.”

Zeldin’s reference to more fringe theories regarding extreme weather coincides with the Trump administration’s reduction in climate change research funding and the removal of a website hosting the government’s climate assessment. President Donald Trump referred to climate change as a hoax, despite scientists uncovering stronger evidence linking the intensity and frequency of extreme weather to global warming.

Decades of research on weather modification have often fueled conspiracy theories.

From 1962 to 1982, NOAA participated in a project called Storm Fury, which aimed to investigate whether hurricane intensity could be altered. This study did not achieve its goals and was ultimately discontinued. NOAA has not undertaken similar research since. According to the factsheet.

Cloud seeding is a weather modification technology currently utilized. This practice has existed since the 1950s and typically involves dispersing silver iodide into clouds to extract moisture from the atmosphere, resulting in additional precipitation. Presently, cloud seeding programs are mainly focused on enhancing water supplies in western states. Companies are required to notify authorities before implementing such measures.

“Cloud seeding doesn’t generate water; it aids surrounding clouds in releasing 5-15% of their moisture. However, Texas was already experiencing 100% humidity, extreme moisture, and storms. The clouds didn’t require assistance,” Cappucci stated.

The proliferation of these claims coincides with escalating threats directed at meteorologists.

Geoengineering is a legitimate scientific field; however, assertions regarding its capability to control significant weather patterns and generate adverse weather are unfounded. Most geoengineering techniques remain theoretical and untested, with federal researchers making only tentative steps to evaluate their viability. Atmospheric scientists report no evidence of any large-scale programs.

Last year, in Alameda, California, a small test project in geoengineering, referred to as Marine Cloud Brightening, was disrupted by community protestors, despite researchers demonstrating its safety.

Psychotherapist Jonathan Alpert described how conspiracy theories tend to surge, particularly during moments of weather events that leave individuals feeling powerless.

“Conspiracy theories offer emotionally gratifying narratives. They restore a sense of control by framing phenomena as intentional actions by powerful entities rather than unpredictable chaotic events,” Alpert told NBC News. “In this context, believing ‘someone is doing this to us’ is more bearable than facing the idea that ‘no one is in charge.'”

While some interpret the EPA’s actions as a sign of transparency, others view it merely as a recent political maneuver to sidestep critical environmental issues.

“Some individuals question whether the bird is real or not. Will that become your next focus?” Congressman Don Beyer D-Va remarked in response to Zeldin’s comments on Thursday morning. He went on to comment on X regarding the EPA guidelines, “How much taxpayer money will be expended on this?”

Source: www.nbcnews.com

EPA Employees Label Moves Under Trump as “Declaration of Objection”

Posted on by
Reply

On Monday, a collective of Environmental Protection Agency staff expressed dissent regarding the agency’s policies during the Trump administration, stating it “undermines the EPA’s mission to safeguard human health and the environment.”

More than 170 EPA employees have cited documents and signed anonymously due to concerns of retaliation, according to Jeremy Berg, former editor-in-chief of Science Magazine. This group includes over 70 Nobel Prize winners and other non-EPA scientists and academics.

The letter marks a rare public critique from agency employees who risk facing backlash for voicing their disagreement with the federal administration’s support for climate, environment, and health sciences. Scientists at the National Institutes of Health experienced a similar situation in early June.

“Since its inception in 1970, the EPA has fulfilled its mission by utilizing science, funding, and professional staff to serve Americans. We oppose the current administration’s emphasis on harmful deregulation, misrepresentation of past EPA actions, and disregard for scientific expertise.”

A spokesperson for the agency did not provide an immediate comment when contacted on Monday.

Employees Hope for a Return to EPA’s Core Mission

“I’m genuinely upset. This agency was a beacon for me in my youth. We aren’t upholding the ideals of this agency under the current administration, and we truly desire that,” stated Amelia Herzberg, an EPA environmental protection specialist who is currently on administrative leave from the Environmental Justice and Civil Rights Bureau.

Herzberg’s role focused on protecting the most vulnerable populations impacted by contamination. This includes pregnant and nursing individuals, children and infants, the elderly, those with chronic health conditions, and communities exposed to greater contamination levels. “This shouldn’t be controversial, but it is in today’s political climate,” she remarked.

“Americans should have access to clean water and air without the risk of poisoning. If not, our government has failed,” she asserted.

Berg, who led the National Institute of Integrated Medical Sciences at the NIH from 2003 to 2011, emphasized that the dissent is not driven by partisan agendas but aims to guide employees back to the foundational mission of the EPA, which is fundamentally about “breathing clean air and drinking safe water.”

The letter articulated five primary concerns of EPA employees: disregarding scientific consensus for polluter benefit, reversing progress in vulnerable U.S. communities, dismantling the Research and Development Bureau, and fostering a culture of fear that forces staff to choose between their livelihoods and well-being.

EPA’s Funding Cuts and Regulatory Reversals

Under the administration of Lee Zeldin, the EPA has announced cuts to funding for environmental improvements in minority communities and plans to roll back federal regulations. Air pollution in national parks and tribal lands is also under scrutiny, along with revisiting bans on certain asbestos types and proposed rules limiting greenhouse gas emissions from coal and gas power plants.

Zeldin has initiated a reorganization of EPA’s R&D Office as part of his initiative to reduce budgets and impede research on climate change and environmental justice. Furthermore, he is poised to retract pollution regulations that could reportedly save 30,000 lives and yield $275 billion annually.

“People will die,” stated Carol Grader, a Nobel Prize laureate and professor of molecular and cell biology at the University of California, Santa Cruz. She referenced last week’s East Coast heatwave as evidence of the real effects of climate change. “If there are no scientists at the EPA, more lives will be lost due to ignorance about our work and its impact on air quality,” she added.

Berg highlighted the significance of the objection declarations from both NIH and EPA employees. These actions reflect a need for consideration about the future of research funding.

When discussing her concerns about potential repercussions, Grader noted that she “experiences all the implications” and frequently engages with graduate students anxious about pursuing scientific careers amidst funding cuts.

She concluded, “If we neglect to support the next generation of scientists, it will lead to long-term consequences: ‘It’s a decades-long issue.’

Source: www.nbcnews.com

Trump’s EPA Aims to Eliminate Carbon Emission Regulations for Power Plants

Posted on by
Reply

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) revealed on Wednesday its intention to lift current limitations on greenhouse gas emissions from coal and gas-fired power plants.

EPA administrator Lee Zeldin stated at a press conference that the carbon pollution standards established during the Biden administration “stifle” economic growth in the name of environmental protection. Zeldin, who was appointed by President Donald Trump in January, emphasized that this announcement marks significant progress in US energy management and reassured that the agency would not allow power plants to generate more electricity than they currently do. Presently, the electricity sector represents a quarter of total US emissions. Latest EPA Emissions Data.

Zeldin also indicated that the EPA plans to roll back regulations related to mercury emissions from power plants set by the Biden administration.

Environmental advocates argue that the EPA’s proposal intensifies the Trump administration’s ongoing efforts to reshape climate initiatives across various federal agencies, including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Department of Energy, and the National Weather Service. In 2024, the Biden administration confirmed its commitment to address the climate crisis with the most stringent carbon pollution standards for power plants to date, which now face an uncertain future.

Gina McCarthy, who served as EPA administrator under President Joe Biden, described Zeldin’s announcement as a “political maneuver” in a statement on Wednesday that dismissed a “decade of scientific research and policy evaluation.”

“By allowing increased pollution, his legacy will be defined by those who cater to the fossil fuel industry at the cost of public health,” McCarthy stated.

On January 25th, Jeffrey Energy Center’s coal-fired power plant near Emmett, Kansas.
Charlie Riedel / AP file

“Science and daily observations tell us that removing pollution standards on the largest industrial gas polluters in the United States is a mistake,” stated Jill Tauber, vice president of climate and energy litigation at Earthjustice, a nonprofit currently involved in litigation against the Trump administration over various environmental rollbacks.

US power plants are significant sources of global carbon emissions. A report from the Institute of Policy Integrity at New York University indicates that if the US electricity sector were treated as a separate nation, it would rank as the sixth largest emitter worldwide.

During the first Trump administration, the EPA loosened several Obama-era greenhouse gas regulations for power plants, but this latest announcement marks a shift towards completely eliminating such standards. Zeldin is following through on his commitment made in March to challenge the “religion of climate change” by revisiting or rescinding 31 regulations related to tailpipe emissions, coal ash, and wastewater management from oil and gas.

The proposed regulations, which are now open for public commentary, are facing scrutiny from legal advocates and environmental organizations like the Natural Resources Defense Council. They contend that the EPA has a legal obligation to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Legal precedent mandates that greenhouse gases be controlled by the EPA under the Clean Air Act.

“We are closely monitoring whether the EPA will remove these crucial standards based on legal reasoning that is likely to be unviable,” remarked Meredith Hawkins, Federal Climate Law Director for the Natural Resources Defense Council. “The NRDC is prepared to take legal action to ensure our right to breathe clean air is upheld.”

Reducing historic limits on greenhouse gas emissions from power plants could significantly influence global climate change, as well as have adverse effects on human health and the economy.

Harvey Writer, a lawyer and law professor at George Washington University, expressed hope that if the EPA pursues its planned deregulation, energy companies and utilities committed to renewable energy investments will challenge the Trump administration in court.

“The primary consequence of the proposed regulations is uncertainty and instability,” he stated. “It leaves stakeholders unsure about the next steps ahead. This complicates investment choices and affects job-related decisions, generating widespread market uncertainty.”

Greenhouse gas emissions from power plants extend beyond climate concerns. The combustion of fossil fuels emits carbon dioxide and various air pollutants, including nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, mercury, and particulate matter. These pollutants are linked to higher instances of respiratory ailments and cardiovascular disease. Regulating carbon emissions from power plants can lead to a broader reduction in air pollution for communities near these facilities, according to Laura Kate Bender, vice president of national advocacy and public policy at the American Lung Association.

“This is a dual-edged sword. On the one hand, fossil fuel-fired power plants exacerbate climate change while simultaneously causing health issues,” Bender noted. “Climate change is a public health crisis, and mitigating carbon emissions in the electricity sector is crucial to addressing this emergency.”

Source: www.nbcnews.com

EPA to Relax Mercury Restrictions on Power Plants

Posted on by
Reply

The Environmental Protection Agency is poised to roll back Biden-era regulations aimed at limiting pollutants, including mercury emissions, a neurotoxin harmful to brain development, as per internal agency documents.

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin is set to unveil these proposed changes shortly, as informed by two individuals familiar with the agency’s intentions. He will also introduce another proposal to lift greenhouse gas restrictions on power plants, according to sources who requested anonymity due to the sensitivity of the information.

These alterations signify a rejection of the Biden administration’s initiatives to combat climate change and address the significant air pollution plaguing communities near power plants and industrial sites. Legal challenges are anticipated concerning these rules later this year.

This move aligns with a broader plan by the Trump administration to extend fossil fuel usage, which has exacerbated global warming. President Trump has recently taken multiple steps to bolster the reliance on polluting coal.

An EPA representative did not confirm specifics about the new regulations or the timeline for their release. However, Zeldin stated that he “opposes the shutdown of clean, affordable, and reliable energy for American families.”

He added, “The EPA should adopt sensible regulations to foster a great American recovery, instead of continuing the path of devastation and impoverishment of the previous administration.”

Zeldin’s proposal regarding mercury and other hazardous substances, as reported by the New York Times, speculates that in 2024, the Biden administration would “unjustly target” coal-fired power plants if contamination levels were restricted.

The documents indicate that new regulations will relax emission limits for harmful substances like lead, nickel, and arsenic by 67%. For certain coal plants, the proposed rule would decrease the mercury limit by 70%, while also dispensing with the requirement for all plants to continually monitor chimney emissions.

These amendments counter the most stringent rules set by the Biden administration, which aimed to reduce dangerous toxins and encourage a shift from coal-fired plants to renewable energy sources like solar and wind.

Burning coal emits mercury, which can contaminate land, oceans, and waterways. According to the EPA, coal-fired power plants are responsible for 44% of all mercury emissions in the United States.

In the atmosphere, mercury emissions transform into a toxic form known as methyl mercury, which accumulates in fish and other food sources. This exposure can lead to significant neurological harm in developing fetuses and children, and is linked to respiratory and cardiovascular diseases in adults.

“Children’s brains are growing rapidly, and mercury exposure can severely impact their development,” remarked Matthew Davis, a former EPA official. The initial regulations aimed at reducing mercury emissions from coal plants were established during the Obama administration.

The federal government first enacted strict controls on mercury emissions from power plants in 2011 under President Barack Obama. Following this, regulations were loosened during the initial Trump administration, but were tightened again under Biden. In October, the Supreme Court dismissed requests from 23 Republican states and some coal companies, preventing the reversal of the policy.

In April, the Trump administration granted exemptions for numerous coal-fired power plants from mercury and other air pollutant restrictions. Davis, currently the vice president for federal policy at the Conservation Voters Federation, referred to these as “get-out-of-jail-free cards” for polluters.

“This administration aims to demolish protections for our health and demonstrates indifference toward the well-being of future generations who might suffer from the harmful effects of this toxic substance,” he said.

Anticipated regulations aimed at weakening mercury standards are expected to accompany plans to eliminate all restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions from coal and gas-fired power plants.

As per the latest data available on the EPA website, the electricity sector is the second largest contributor to greenhouse gases, following transportation. Power plants are responsible for approximately 30% of the pollution driving climate change globally.

However, according to a draft rule examined by The New York Times, Zeldin plans to contend that emissions from U.S. power plants have not contributed “significantly” to climate change.

He claims that emissions from U.S. fossil fuel-burning power plants accounted for only 3% of global greenhouse gases in 2022, down from 5.5% in 2005.

Analysts, however, argue that the Trump administration is making misleading comparisons. U.S. power plants were responsible for about 25% of greenhouse gas emissions produced in the country in 2022, with approximately 1.5 billion tons in emissions projected for 2023, exceeding total emissions from most countries.

Laura Kate Bender, assistant vice president of the American Lung Association, described this outdated rationale as a “setback” in combating climate change and air pollution.

“Together, these rules could lead to increased pollution that could have been avoided for communities surrounding power plants, exposing them to more harmful emissions that could have been mitigated,” she stated.

Source: www.nytimes.com

Trump Administration Unveils Overhaul of EPA, Streamlining Approval for New Chemicals

Posted on by
Reply

On Friday, the Environmental Protection Agency announced plans to reassign scientists from independent labs to various departments.

Administrator Lee Zeldin disclosed these adjustments in a video statement, indicating that the agency is “reshaping scientific expertise” to concentrate on what are deemed “mission essentials.”

The most immediate impact will be on the Research and Development Bureau, the EPA’s primary research faction, which investigates aspects like the health and environmental repercussions of “eternal chemicals” in drinking water, as well as strategies to lessen airborne particulate pollution.

An internal document reviewed by the New York Times highlighted the Trump administration’s proposal to dissolve this office as part of a plan to eliminate 1,155 scientists, including chemists, biologists, and toxicologists engaged in health and environmental research.

While the changes weren’t enacted on Friday, the agency’s new focus areas were unveiled. According to Zeldin, 130 positions will transition to the office responsible for new chemical approvals, addressing the long-standing backlog cited by the Chemical Industry Group.

During the All Hands Staff Meeting later that day, Nancy Beck, a previous lobbyist for the American Council of Chemicals and now at the helm of the EPA’s chemicals office, reassured Scientists, remarking that it was a “very exciting time.”

She encouraged everyone in the agency to consider applying for these roles.

Officials from the Trump administration have indicated that further laboratory changes are on the horizon. A scientist on a call expressed concern that failing to transition to one of the new areas might result in job termination.

Additionally, on Friday, the EPA postponed the deadline for accepting withdrawal offers, which is now extended to May 9.

“This feels like a hunger game,” remarked a lab employee who opted for anonymity to avoid potential retaliation.

Other scientists will transition to managerial positions as part of the new office focused on applied scientific environmental solutions. Zeldin emphasized the need to “put science at the center of agency regulations.”

Democrats and environmental advocates have raised concerns that these changes could politicize scientific inquiry.

“This so-called ‘reorganization’ is merely a thinly veiled effort to diminish the agency’s globally respected scientific capacity by redistributing scientists and managing chemical assessments for the industry,” stated Deputy Director Cherry Pingley, a Democrat from Maine.

Chitra Kumar, managing director of the climate program at the federal advocacy group Concern Scientists Federal, warned that relocating scientists to policy offices “will expose these experts to political pressures, particularly in this administration.”

This shift occurs amidst the agency’s extensive deregulation initiative. Under Zeldin’s direction, the EPA has revised or rescinded over 30 regulations intended to safeguard air, water, and climate quality. Managers are also focused on dismantling the legal foundations of many climate regulations known as danger detection.

Source: www.nytimes.com

EPA Plans to Address “Forever Chemicals,” but Details are Limited.

Posted on by
Reply

The Trump administration has announced an increase in initiatives aimed at addressing PFA pollution, yet it remains vague regarding its support for Biden-era regulations that demand utilities to eliminate “forever chemicals” from the drinking water of millions of Americans.

“We are excited to engage in this process of exploring the world,” stated Lee Zeldin, Environmental Protection Agency administrator. “This marks the beginning of the efforts by Americans at PFA to ensure they enjoy the cleanest air, land, and water.”

PFA, or polyfluoroalkyl substances, are a group of chemicals linked to cancer and other health issues, commonly found in products like waterproof clothing and paper straws. These persistent chemicals are contaminating drinking water across the nation. According to the latest EPA data, up to 158 million Americans are impacted by PFA in their water.

Last year, President Joseph R. Biden Jr. implemented the first PFA limits on drinking water, effectively mandating local government water systems to eliminate specific types of PFA.

However, the Water and Chemical Industry Group has initiated a lawsuit claiming that drinking water standards impose excessive costs. The Trump administration is set to determine in court whether to maintain these standards ahead of the May 12 deadline.

On Monday, the EPA unveiled measures to combat PFA contamination, including designating officials to lead the agency’s chemical efforts, crafting guidelines on permissible PFA discharge from plants, engaging Congress, and developing mechanisms to hold contaminators responsible.

The EPA further indicated it would establish a plan to manage PFAS contamination in fertilizers derived from sewage sludge. There is heightened concern regarding the extensive contamination of U.S. farmland due to biosolid fertilizers containing harmful PFA levels.

Environmental groups expressed that the EPA’s proposal lacked clarity, particularly regarding the commitment to uphold Biden-era drinking water standards. Among the few indicators of the Trump administration’s approach was a reference to the need to address “compliance challenges.”

The Trump administration also faces a court deadline next month concerning its defense of two types of PFA classifications that require polluters to clean under the nation’s Superfund Act.

“What we really want is a clear answer; they are completely dodging this issue,” commented Eric D. Olson, senior strategist for drinking water and health at the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental advocacy group.

Olson noted that while the EPA claims to base its actions on scientific evidence, he pointed out that the agency plans to reduce its scientific research division and cut its overall budget by 65%. “On one hand, the EPA announces new initiatives, yet on the other, it aims to reduce budgets and eliminate the scientists responsible for these efforts,” he stated. “I fail to see how this reconciles.”

EPA spokesperson Dominique Joseph stated that the agency’s new leadership is currently reviewing the Biden administration’s drinking water standards. She did not provide insights on how the EPA plans to move forward with its Superfund policy.

Industry groups, including the American Water Works Association and the National Association of Manufacturers, that are suing the EPA over PFAs did not respond immediately.

James L. Ferraro, an environmental attorney representing several water operators, remarked that the EPA announcement “shows that agencies are aware of the financial strain that PFAS regulations impose on public water systems and the industry.” However, he noted that the new measures seemed “very preliminary.” “We’ll see how this develops.”

The EPA’s announcement on addressing PFA comes as the administration pursues broader efforts to roll back national climate and environmental regulations. Yet, polling consistently reveals that Americans prioritize clean water protection over climate change policies. This remains popular across political lines.

Even the White House has pushed back against the use of paper straws, citing that “scientists and regulators have raised significant concerns about PFAS chemicals for decades.”

Source: www.nytimes.com

EPA initiates staff reductions for environmental justice workers

Posted on by
Reply

The Environmental Protection Agency has initiated significant staffing changes by beginning the process of reducing hundreds of staff through a “power reduction” process.

Last month, the agency announced a large-scale rollback of environmental regulations, including key components of the Clean Air Act, with administrator Lieseldin vowing to undermine the fight against climate change.

In February, the EPA placed environmental justice staff on administrative leave and terminated some probationary workers. Many employees are now working remotely or engaging in telework.

The latest action by the agency involves the beginning of the termination process for around 280 workers who were involved in environmental justice and diversity, equity, and inclusive programs. Additionally, 175 EPA employees have been reassigned to new roles.

“Today, the EPA has informed employees focusing on diversity, equity, and inclusion and environmental justice of the agency’s necessity to reduce personnel through the handbook and federal regulations governing the RIF procedure,” said EPA spokesperson Molly Vaseliou in an email statement. “Certain employees have also been notified of their reassignment to different offices as part of this process.”

NBC News has obtained a memorandum sent to employees affected by the power reduction, indicating that the reduced staffing levels at the EPA will come into effect on July 31st.

“President Trump’s election was a call to action from the American people, which includes issuing executive orders for significant changes within the federal bureaucracy to benefit American families, workers, taxpayers, and the government as a whole,” the memorandum explains. “We appreciate your understanding and cooperation during this transitional period.”

Source: www.nbcnews.com

EPA offers email option to bypass clean air regulations

Posted on by
Reply

The Biden administration has urged coal and oil-fired power plants to cut back on toxic chemical emissions, including mercury.

Today, the Trump administration is offering a special opportunity for businesses. By sending an email, you could receive permission from President Trump to bypass new restrictions and other major clean air regulations.

The Environmental Protection Agency announced this week that a vague section of the Clean Air Act allows the president to temporarily exempt industrial facilities from new regulations if the necessary technology is unavailable and if it is for national security reasons.

In notifications to businesses, the agency provided templates for seeking approval, including what to include in the subject line of an email. “The president will make a decision on merit,” stated a notice issued by the EPA on Monday.

Joseph Goffman, former executive director of the Harvard Law School Environment and Energy Law Program, expressed concern that President Trump is establishing a process that lacks scrutiny.

Goffman noted that government agencies typically set more specific standards for exemptions from regulations. He argued that Congress intended to include conditions in the Clean Air Act that would ensure some level of pollution control.

He stated, “It’s strongly indicated that decisions will be made on an ad hoc basis at best, as the provision doesn’t currently exist. This contradicts Congress’ intent, disregards the public health needs of affected communities, and goes against the EPA’s historical practices.”

EPA spokesperson Molly Vaseliou disagreed with this perspective, asserting that there is no explicit requirement for such conditions in the law. “This type of legal analysis seems in line with the responsibilities given,” she stated in an email addressing the interpretation of the law.

Under the latest policy, businesses can apply for up to two years of exemptions from various new restrictions on the emission of toxic substances like mercury and arsenic. This includes ethylene oxide, a carcinogen used in sterilizing medical devices.

Former New York Congressman Zeldin also mentioned that coal-fired power plants could seek exemptions from new regulations requiring them to address the health risks associated with coal ash, a toxic byproduct of electricity production through burning.

The EPA plans to eventually revise many of these same regulations, a complex process that will take time. While this process unfolds, companies are able to avoid complying with certain rules.

Critics like Pugh find it difficult to justify these exemptions, especially since the Biden administration had already identified feasible alternatives for the new rules. They also question the notion that contamination is in the national interest.

As of Thursday, it remained unclear whether companies had begun applying for exemptions, if any were granted, or if they would be made public. The deadline for applying for exemptions is by the end of the month, according to the EPA.

Alexa Lopez, spokesperson for the National Association of Manufacturers, expressed gratitude for the EPA’s consideration of exemptions for affected manufacturers. “NAM is prepared to collaborate with the administration to find a sustainable solution that protects the environment and supports manufacturers in global competition,” Lopez stated.

Source: www.nytimes.com

Increasing Risks to EPA Investigations of Severe Contamination

Posted on by
Reply

Refineries in New Mexico are blaming the federal government for severe air pollution issues.

A chemical plant in Louisiana is under investigation for gas leaks from storage tanks.

An Idaho rancher is accused of polluting wetlands.

Under President Biden, the Environmental Protection Agency took a strong stance on environmental enforcement against pollution and waste violations. On the other hand, the Trump administration aims to shift the EPA’s focus from environmental protection to reducing costs related to transportation, heating, and business operations. The stability of long-term research initiatives is now uncertain due to recent EPA policy changes.

A memo from March 12 states that EPA enforcement actions will not intervene in energy production unless there is an immediate health risk. The memo also undermines President Biden’s efforts to address pollution disparities affecting low-income communities. It emphasizes that no consideration should be given to the affected individuals’ minority or economic status.

EPA Administrator, Lee Zeldin, believes these changes enable agents to focus on their core mission and contribute to a successful American resurgence.

David Ullman, who oversaw enforcement at the EPA during the Biden administration, criticized the recent memo for absolving corporations, especially in the oil and gas industry, of responsibility for breaking the law.

He expressed concern that these changes harm communities across the United States.

EPA spokesperson, Molly Vaseliou, refrained from commenting on ongoing investigations. The Justice Department, facing internal issues and budget cuts, also chose not to comment.

Conservatives argue that EPA regulations hinder economic growth and investment, while supporters believe that deregulation efforts will boost American energy and reduce costs for families.

Despite ongoing enforcement cases initiated by the Biden administration, the direction of the EPA’s objectives is shifting under the Trump administration, including the removal of key environmental regulations.

… (content continued in the same format)

Source: www.nytimes.com

Staff laid off and map tools shut down amidst a tumultuous week at EPA

Posted on by
Reply

summary

  • Over the past two weeks, EPA staff have had to compete with dramatic reforms at the agency.
  • Approximately 1,100 “probation” employees were said to be possible to be fired, and 168 staff working on environmental justice issues have been taken on leave.
  • Lee Zeldin, new manager at the EPA, said agency priorities include improving AI and automotive jobs.

Lee Zeldin led the Environmental Protection Agency in a short and a half weeks. HR movements shaking wildly, rattling some staff, like many others.

On the day of Zeldin's confirmation last week, the EPA notified about 1,100 “probation” employees that they could close at any time for less than one year.

Then on Thursday, the agency placed 168 staff members on administrative leave. The affected people were working on environmental justice issues across the EPA's 10 regional offices and headquarters.

This week, the agency removed an online mapping tool called EJScreen. It was being used by federal, state and local governments to make decisions that support environmental justice. The term explains the idea that people should have equitable access to a clean, healthy environment, and that some underserved communities face historically unbalanced environmental harms. It refers to. For example, state highway agencies You can use EJScreen Check demographic information for which the road construction project was planned.

Zeldin took on his post a day after a federal worker received a “road fork” email offering resignation shopping. Their deadline to accept the offer was Thursday night, but a federal judge put the initiative on hold that day, following legal challenges from the union. The program will be blocked until at least Monday.

in Addresses to staff viewed by over 10,000 people On Tuesday, Zeldin said he has the authority to streamline the EPA and reduce the waste in it.

“We accused Congress of being as efficient as possible with the taxes sent to us,” Zeldin said, adding that Americans “are feeling a lot of financial pain.” Ta.

His initial actions and the shock they inflict on staff suggest that Zeldin and the Trump administration are not wasting time dramatically reworking the EPA and redefine its purpose. .

Environmental Protection Agency spokesman Molly Vaserio said the EPA is focused on adhering to President Donald Trump's executive orders, including an order entitled “Extreme and Waste Government DEI Program.” Ta.

“The EPA is enthusiastically implementing President Trump's executive order and subsequent related implementation memos. President Trump has been elected to delegate from the Americans to do this,” Vaselio said. .

Several EPA staff members said fear and hype quickly permeated the agency.

“The past two weeks have been pretty scary,” said Marie Owens Powell, chairman of the U.S. Government Employees Federation Council 238, the union representing around 8,500 EPA staff. “Every day, it was something. It was exhausting.”

Powell worked As an EPA Storage Tank InspectorAdded that there were other recent surprises, such as when the pronouns of staff preference were removed from email signatures without notice.

Another EPA worker asked that his name not be made public due to fear of retaliation, but explained that the feeling was “limbo” or “purgatory.”

“We are afraid of doing work that can be seen as completely opposed to the executive order or against Trump's agenda. We want to speak up and push back. But the fear is obvious,” the staff said. “We're all waiting to see who's next.”

Vaseliou met with staff at the Career EPA to visit several disaster sites, including East Palestine, Ohio, and visited several disaster sites, including trains carrying chemicals in February 2023, and to visit several disaster sites, and toxins. He said he had spent his first few weeks of emitting smoke. He also went to Los Angeles. There, a wildfire that broke out last month raided thousands of homes and headed to West North Carolina where Hurricane Helene killed dozens of people.

In Zeldin's news release on Tuesday We laid out five priorities For the EPA under his leadership, including an effort to “pursuing energy independence,” we will develop “the cleanest energy on the planet” to ensure clean air and water. However, some of his agenda diverges from the core mission of the EPA, at least as it operates under past administrations. These include advances in artificial intelligence, reforming and reviving permits for auto work.

Jeremy Simmons, senior adviser to the Environmental Protection Network, a former EPA staff group, said he is worried about the direction the agency is on the lead, based on Zeldin's statement.

“If you're worried about toxic contamination in your community, it's difficult to see yourself on that agenda,” said Symons, who worked at the EPA from 1994 to 2001, in the service of the political agenda. ”

Congressional Democrats appear to be preparing for the fight for the future of the EPA. D-Mass. Sen. Ed Markey of the group attempted to enter agency headquarters on Thursday, calling for a meeting with representatives from Elon Musk's Government Efficiency Bureau.

“We just went in and asked for a meeting with a representative from Doge. We were denied and we were turned away,” Markey said at a press conference outside the building.

Vaseliou said he had not taken the appropriate steps necessary to allow Markey to enter headquarters and described the event as a “promotion stunt.”

A Markey spokesperson said Thursday that the senator has not received confirmation as to whether Doge's representatives are at the EPA. However, multiple sources say the names of workers that NBC News identified as members of Doge member Cole Killian were listed in the EPA directory.

Emails to Killian's EPA email requesting an interview were not immediately returned. Vaseliou did not answer questions about Killian or whether he was connected to Doge.

When asked about Marquee's concerns on Thursday, White House deputy press secretary Harrison Fields said Democrats were “gaslighting” about Doge's mission.

“To reduce waste, fraud, abuse and become a better steward of the hard-earned dollars for American taxpayers may be a crime for Democrats, but it's not a crime in court,” Fields said. I said that.

Source: www.nbcnews.com

More than 1,000 EPA employees at risk of immediate rejection.

Posted on by
Reply

summary

  • Approximately 1,100 EPA employees received emails that they could lose their job immediately.
  • E-mail is identified as the most likely “care observation” for the recipient. In other words, it means that you work for less than a year at the EPA and have less employment protection.
  • The union representative said that the message was scary for many recipients.

The Trump administration has notified more than 1,000 employees of the Environmental Protection Agency that they could be fired immediately.

According to an e-mail reviewed by NBC NEWS, an agency notified that in less than a year, it has been identified as an employee who is likely to be in the “trial period” in less than a year. I received it.

“As an employee during the probation/trial period, the agency has the right to end you,” says the email. “The probation process is to receive the end notification and the employment ends immediately.”

According to Marie Owens Powell, chairman of the US government employee council 238, a leading union of about 8,500 EPA staff, about 1,100 employees received emails. Powell said she had received an employee list from an agency.

“The probation employees have not been released yet,” Powell said. “As you can imagine, I was afraid that people would receive a message, and we accept questions from those people. Agency can clearly reject the insurance observation employees. But it must be for the cause. ”

Powell added that if an employee was fired, the union added, “Make sure the process has been protected.”

It is not clear how many EPA employees are targeted for reduction. This email comes when the Trump administration promotes strongly to reduce the government. They provided the acquisition of federal employees, trying to temporarily freeze the federal aid, and tried to close US international development agencies. The EPA employees were one of the federal workers who received the acquisition offer entitled “Folk in the Road”.

“This email is one of the series of e -mails received from January 20, most of the EPA, and is certainly a shocking type attack.” Powell said.

Already, she added that union members who worked on diversity, fairness, and inclusive issues are on management leave.

“I am directly engaged with the EPA headquarters career staff,” said Lee Zeldin administrator, a former U.S. national representative in New York, which was confirmed on Wednesday, Molly VaselioU, EPA spokesman.

“EPA is eager to guidance related to President Trump's presidential order,” said Vaseliou. “Our goals are open and transparent. Since we are working to improve the efficiency of the whole government, we understand how all the staff understand the law and how policy decisions will affect. Eventually, the goal is to create a more effective and more effective federal government.

VaselioU did not respond directly to the question of whether the institution would leave the e -mail to workers.

If the worker is fired, the right of their appeal depends on whether they are qualified as employees under federal law, and are employees with employees. It depends on Completed a one -year continuous service。

However, Powell said that several employees with more than a year have received emails and contacted the union.

“The list is definitely defective. Powell said that some of the federal services for more than one year had received e -mails, and for the EPA leader,” This is a practice to correct the list. I added. “

Nicole Cantello, the president of another union, representing EPA employees, knew several employees on the list, but had more than a year. I said.

CNN first reported In emails to EPA workers, some federal employees will be a kind of whiplash, depending on which party is dominated as environmental policy ping -pongs.

“We are concerned that government agencies will carry out mass -disclosure of probation employees,” said Cantello, Cantello.

“Inspection employees are usually released because they do not work well or have discipline. I have never fired a large number of trials in 33 years when I went to the EPA. This is the precedent. There are no scope and scale, “she said,” she added that she had little protection.

“As long as they say the reason, everyone will do something,” said Cantello, mentioning the EPA leader.

Jeremy Simmons, a senior advisor to the former EPA staff, has regarded recent transition between governments as the most “mixed OTIC” in the history of institutions. Simmons worked as an EPA climate advisor from 1994 to 2001, and was in an institution when President George W. Bush was appointed President Birkrinton.

“The transition was defined by a different policy agenda, but it was not this Vindictive Purge, a civil servant who did not do anything wrong,” he said.

Source: www.nbcnews.com

EPA Institutes Ban on Pesticides that Pose Risks to Unborn Babies

Posted on by
Reply

The Environmental Protection Agency announced on Tuesday that an emergency order has been issued. This action is the first of its kind in almost four decades and aims to halt the use of pesticides that may harm unborn babies.

The herbicide in question, dimethyltetrachloroterephthalate (DCPA or Dacthal), is commonly used to control weeds in various crops like broccoli, onions, kale, Brussels sprouts, cabbage, and strawberries.

Exposure to this chemical during pregnancy can lead to changes in thyroid hormone levels in the fetus, which could result in long-term negative impacts such as low birth weight, impaired brain development, lower IQ, and diminished motor skills later in life, according to the EPA.

This risk prompted the EPA to take decisive action and suspend the use of the pesticide. Michal Friedhoff, deputy director of the Office for Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, stated, “DCPA is extremely dangerous and needs to be removed from the market immediately.” The agency emphasized this in a statement.

The emergency order is now in effect.

Friedhoff further emphasized the EPA’s role in safeguarding the public from hazardous chemicals, saying, “In this case, a pregnant woman who unknowingly encounters DCPA could give birth to a child with irreversible health issues.”

The DCPA has been banned in the European Union since 2009.

Miri Treviño Sauceda, executive director of the National Farmers Union, praised the EPA’s decision as “historic.”

The suspension follows years of dialogue between the EPA and AMVAC Chemical Corporation, the sole manufacturer of DCPA.

The company has not responded to requests for comment.

In 2013, the EPA requested data from AMVAC on the herbicide’s health effects, specifically requesting comprehensive studies on DCPA’s impact on thyroid development. Despite receiving multiple studies from AMVAC between 2013 and 2021, the EPA found the data inadequate and did not accept certain requests, including the thyroid study, until it was finally submitted in August 2022.

The EPA’s recent assessment of DCPA was part of a routine process to reassess registered pesticides. Inspections occur every 15 years to ensure there are no adverse health effects or environmental hazards.

Source: www.nbcnews.com

EPA introduces new regulations to decrease carbon emissions and encourage the use of electric vehicles and hybrids

Posted on by
Reply

The Biden administration revealed updated vehicle emissions standards on Wednesday, described as the most ambitious effort yet to reduce global warming emissions from passenger vehicles.

While the new regulations relax the original tailpipe limits proposed last year, they will ultimately align more closely with the stringent standards established by the Environmental Protection Agency.

These standards will be enforced in conjunction with the sale of electric vehicles, which must meet the requirements. The auto industry had opposed the EPA’s initial standards, announced in April last year, citing a slowdown in sales growth. The administration, however, remains committed to its ambitious plans to decrease emissions from passenger cars contributing to global warming.

Under the finalized rule, the EPA will mandate that by 2032, 56% of new vehicle sales should be electric vehicles, with at least 13% being plug-in hybrids or partially electric vehicles, along with more fuel-efficient gasoline-powered cars that get higher mileage.

The EPA estimates that these new standards will result in annual savings of $100 billion, over 7 billion tons of avoided global warming carbon emissions over the next three decades, reduced healthcare costs, fewer deaths, and more than $60 billion in healthcare savings, ultimately leading to overall cost savings in fuel, maintenance, and repairs.

On January 2, 2008, exhaust gas blows out of a car’s tailpipe in San Francisco.
David Paul Morris/Getty Images File

The EPA rule pertains to model years between 2027 and 2032, covering new emissions from new passenger cars, light trucks, pickup trucks, as well as greenhouse gas emissions like nitrogen oxides and particulate matter that contribute to global warming. It will also significantly reduce other forms of air pollution. The EPA asserts that the rule will help combat the climate crisis by substantially decreasing air pollution while promoting the adoption of cleaner vehicle technologies. The finalization of the rules follows a record increase in sales of clean vehicles, including plug-in hybrids and fully electric vehicles, last year.

The revised rules will push back the strict pollution standards’ implementation from 2027 to 2029 after the auto industry argued against the feasibility of the proposed benchmarks. By 2032, the rules will be bolstered to nearly meet the EPA’s recommended thresholds.

EPA Administrator Michael Regan affirmed to reporters that the final rule will yield pollution reductions equal to or greater than those outlined in the proposal. In addition to addressing carbon pollution, Regan emphasized that the ultimate standard will also lessen other severe air pollutants contributing to heart attacks, respiratory issues, exacerbating asthma, and diminishing lung function.

Regan stressed the critical nature of these new standards for public health, American jobs, the economy, and the planet. The standard is designed to be technology-neutral and performance-based, granting auto and truck manufacturers the flexibility to choose pollution control technology that aligns with their customer needs while meeting environmental and public health objectives.

The adjustments in the regulations seem aimed at addressing the strong industry resistance to the accelerated adoption of electric vehicles and the public’s hesitation to fully embrace new technology. Legal challenges in conservative courts also pose a legitimate threat.

With a conservative majority, the Supreme Court has increasingly restricted the power of federal agencies, including the EPA, in recent years. The court has limited the EPA’s ability to combat air and water pollution, further hindering their capability to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants that contribute to global warming.

President Joe Biden has made fighting climate change a central feature of his presidency, with a focus on reducing carbon dioxide emissions from gasoline-powered vehicles, the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S.

To achieve these goals, a Democratic president needs cooperation from the auto industry and political backing from auto workers, a crucial voting bloc. The United Auto Workers union, supporting Biden, endorses the transition to electric vehicles but aims to safeguard jobs and ensure that industry pays competitive wages to workers involved in producing EVs and batteries.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre expressed confidence in the EPA’s final rule, stating that the administration understands that achieving such goals takes time and remains committed to climate action.

Source: www.nbcnews.com