Green Groups Call On Future Biden White House To Overturn New EPA Rule Announced With The Heritage Foundation

image_50427649
on

During a virtual event on Wednesday, December 9 hosted by the Heritage Foundationย โ€” a conservative free market think tank backed by polluters like the petrochemical Koch empireย โ€” the outgoing head of the Environmental Protection Agency (and former coal lobbyist) Andrew Wheeler announced the finalization of a new rule that critics say is a gift to polluting industries opposed to federalย regulations.

The rule is specifically about an accounting process used in rulemaking called a cost-benefit analysis. According to EPAโ€™s announcement, the rule is supposed to increase consistency and transparency when EPA develops regulations under the Clean Air Act. But leading environmental organizations and a former EPA official say the new rule is redundant and dangerous, as it would allow polluters to tie up any new EPA regulations in legal challenges based on claiming the cost-benefit analysis for a given regulation isย inadequate.

โ€œThere is no reason in the world for this regulation. EPA is already doing economic analyses of costs and benefits in the rules that EPA issues. The only difference here is itโ€™s requiring it by regulation and therefore presents something you can sue EPA for,โ€ Roy Gamse, former Director of Economic Analysis and Deputy Assistant Administrator in EPAโ€™s Office of Planning and Evaluation, toldย DeSmog.

โ€œIt allows for someone opposed to what EPA is doing to come in on purely procedural grounds and say you did not comply with your regulations under the Clean Air Act,โ€ he added. โ€œYou did not provide a benefit-cost analysis to my satisfaction of this regulation. That allows them to delay or block the rule while they litigate whether the procedural steps that have been taken are adequate. And thatโ€™s the nefarious aspect ofย this.โ€

According to Gamse, the EPA already has its own internal guidance on how to do economic analyses of regulations. This guidance has been around for decades, and the Office of Management and Budget also requires federal agencies to do an accounting for costs and benefits when they issue regulations. The new rule issued today by Administrator Wheeler is โ€œbasically codifying what EPA has been doing anyway,โ€ Gamseย said.

Screen shot of EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler speaking during a webinar hosted by the Heritage Foundation on Dec.ย 9.ย 

โ€œDesigned to Rewardย Pollutersโ€

Environmental groups slammed Wheelerโ€™s move to finalize this ruleย โ€” saying it is designed to benefit polluters at the expense of Americansโ€™ healthย โ€” and urged the incoming Biden administration to immediately scrapย it.

โ€œThis rule will distort EPAโ€™s assessment of the benefits of Clean Air Act safeguards, making it harder to establish vital, life-saving protections against unhealthy air pollution. The rule puts Americansโ€™ health at risk for no good reason. The incoming Biden administration should immediately take steps to reverse this rule,โ€ Ben Levitan, senior attorney with Environmental Defense Fund, said in a statement.

โ€œThis new rule has no scientific, public health, economic or legal justification, and is a sharp break with past precedent. Itโ€™s aimed purely at rigging the rulemaking process in favor of polluters,โ€ said Rachel Cleetus, policy director for the Climate and Energy Program at the Union of Concernedย Scientists.

โ€œThis rule is designed to reward polluters and push the costs onto the most vulnerable people โ€” prioritizing short-term profits over human lives,โ€ she added. โ€œNext year when the Biden administration takes charge, they must reverse this bad-faith rule and restore the EPAโ€™s ability to do its job to protect the health of communities around theย nation.โ€

Fossil Fuel Lobby Groups Welcomeย Rule

Wheeler officially announced the new policy during a webinar on Wednesday organized by the Heritage Foundationย โ€” the think tank has played an influential role during the Trump administration advocating for dismantling environmental regulations and styming clean energy. And one indication that this rule is a boon to polluters is the positive reaction itโ€™s received from fossil fuel industry supporters and tradeย associations.

The National Mining Association, which represents coal producers, said the rule โ€œwill greatly improve cost-benefit analysis in the rulemakingย process.โ€

The American Petroleum Instituteย โ€” the largest lobby group for the U.S. oil and gas industryย โ€” also praised the rule. โ€œThis policy will help protect public health and the environment cost-effectively as we continue to reduce emissions and invest in innovative technologies while delivering affordable, reliable energy,โ€ API Senior Vice President of Policy, Economics and Regulatory Affairs Frank Macchiarola said in a statement.

But environmental advocates refuted this claim that the new rule will protect public health and theย environment.

โ€œThis is an egregious 11th-hour attempt to handcuff the incoming administration and undercut the benefits of clean air โ€” in the worst days of a global health crisis,โ€ said Emily Davis, senior attorney in the Climate & Clean Energy Program at the Natural Resources Defenseย Council.

โ€œWith this deeply flawed rule, Andrew Wheeler and the Trump Administration are trying to force future EPA Administrators to tip the scales in favor of polluters, not public health,โ€ Al Armendariz, Sierra Clubโ€™s Beyond Coal Campaign Senior Director of Federal Campaigns, said in a statement. โ€œIt says that the EPA doesnโ€™t care about doing thorough work to make sure as many people as possible are protected from dirty air. It says Andrew Wheeler never stopped working for his coal company clients ever after he took an oath to protect us from harmful pollution. And, it says why the American people rejected Wheeler and the Trump Administration lastย month.โ€

Main Image: Coal-fired power plant in central Wyoming. Credit: Greg Goebel via Flickr, CC BYSAย 2.0

image_50427649
Dana is an environmental journalist focusing on climate change and climate accountability reporting. She writes regularly for DeSmog covering topics such as fossil fuel industry opposition to climate action, climate change lawsuits, greenwashing and false climate solutions, and clean transportation.

Related Posts

on

But experts say these โ€œabusiveโ€ lawsuits, which are designed to demoralize and drain resources from activists, should be fought, not feared.

But experts say these โ€œabusiveโ€ lawsuits, which are designed to demoralize and drain resources from activists, should be fought, not feared.
on

A dark money trail linked to pipeline company Energy Transfer could be behind a mysterious mailer targeting North Dakota residents in the lead-up to its trial with Greenpeace.

A dark money trail linked to pipeline company Energy Transfer could be behind a mysterious mailer targeting North Dakota residents in the lead-up to its trial with Greenpeace.
on

Carrboro, N.C., accuses Duke of knowingly fueling the climate crisis for decades with harmful emissions, deception, delay, and "greenwashing."

Carrboro, N.C., accuses Duke of knowingly fueling the climate crisis for decades with harmful emissions, deception, delay, and "greenwashing."
on

Canadian environmentalist Tzeporah Berman makes the case for a "bold idea" to end the era of coal, oil and gas.

Canadian environmentalist Tzeporah Berman makes the case for a "bold idea" to end the era of coal, oil and gas.