EPA has launched a huge regulatory reform process reconsidering 31 of its biggest energy related regulations.
You can see the list plus some interesting discussion here.
A lot of the war on coal is under the gun plus some really bad automotive stuff. Much of it is climate related so including the bogus CO2 Endangerment Finding is very important. If that goes away a lot of the rest might be easily killed.
Examples include coal and gas killing CO2 limits on power plants. Then there are the impossible CO2 limits on cars and trucks that are designed to force people into electric vehicles.
The really good news is the scope is way broader than just climate. It includes sweeping rules like the completely unscientific PM2.5 limits. There is also my personal favorite the rule on mercury emissions from coal fired power plants where EPA said there was no evidence but we are going to regulate it anyway.
Each of these “reconsiderations” will require a full scale rule making so there is a huge amount of work to do. Who will do this work is an interesting question given the pending job cuts plus the fact that most EPA folks love these bad rules. New hires and contracts may be coming but these multiple rule making processes will take a year or more to play through.
I think EPA has at least three different strategies for killing these bad rules. Some are easier than others and which is best for each case remains to be seen.
The most laborious strategy is a rule making based on new science. This involves a lot of research and a completely new set of technical support documents. It may well be required for reversing the Endangerment Finding but since it was done in 2009 there is plenty of newer science to draw on. That the predicted harms failed to occur is especially useful.
The somewhat easier second strategy is to simply compile the arguments against the questionable rule that were filed as comments during its rule making. In this case the new finding is that the prior finding was mistaken. It may be necessary to throw in a bit of new science but most of the research has already been done.
Mercury from coal is a likely prospect here as EPA previously admitted that they could find no physical evidence that the minor mercury emissions from coal burning were the cause of the mercury found in some lakes. The filings against this foolish rule were extensive.
The wacky PM2.5 rule is another likely candidate as PM2.5 is not even a specific substance, just a particle size. There are whole books about how ridiculous this EPA rule is.
These first two strategies use scientific arguments while the third uses a legal argument. In this case EPA simply says it did not have the legal authority to issue the rule in question. Administrator Lee Zeldin has repeatedly said that prior EPA’s have gone way beyond their mission and statutory authority. This sets the stage for rescinding prior rules as illegal.
Interestingly the recent Supreme Court rejection of the prior “Chevron doctrine” makes this legal argument stronger. That doctrine basically said the Courts must defer to the Agencies when it comes to interpreting the law. It follows that EPA rules previously deemed allowable under Chevron may no longer be allowable and EPA itself can make that determination.
Then too if the Endangerment Finding is repealed the other climate rules might all lose their legal basis. Endangerment is a necessary condition for regulatory authority under the Clean Air Act.
What is certain is that 31 big fights lie ahead making this EPA combined action a truly breathtaking event. Stay tuned to CFACT as this supreme battle unfolds.