Latest news with #TheEnvironmentalProtectionAgency
Yahoo
03-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
EPA restructuring to include cuts, consolidation, shifting resources
May 3 (UPI) -- The U.S. The Environmental Protection Agency is consolidating staff and shifting resources, part of a larger restructuring effort that will seek to "bring much needed efficiencies," officials announced. The agency is also planning to cut jobs as part of the shake-up, reducing staffing to levels seen during the 1980s, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said this week. "With these organizational improvements, we recommit to fulfilling all of our statutory obligations and exceptionally delivering on EPA's core mission of protecting human health and the environment. This reorganization will bring much needed efficiencies to incorporate science into our rulemakings and sharply focus our work on providing the cleanest air, land and water for our communities. It will also save at least $300 million annually for the American people," Zeldin said in the agency's statement. Zeldin said the agency will strive to "operate as efficiently and effectively as possible," signaling the possibility of looming job cuts. The New York Times previously reported President Donald Trump's administration planned to fire over 1,500 scientists from the EPA at some point, citing an internal government document. The agency had a workforce of 15,130 people and a $9.158 billion budget in the most recent fiscal year. "This phase of reorganization will save taxpayers more than $300 million annually by Fiscal Year 2026. It is all part of a larger, comprehensive effort to restructure the agency, and when finalized, EPA expects to have employment levels near those seen when President Ronald Reagan occupied the White House," the EPA said in a press release announcing the restructuring. Under the directive, the focus will shift to strengthening partnerships with state-level agencies, particularly when it comes to air and water monitoring. "In the Office of Air and Radiation, we're establishing the first-ever Office of State Air Partnerships to improve coordination with state, local, and tribal air permitting agencies. This collaborative approach will resolve permitting concerns more efficiently and ensure EPA is working with states, not against them, to advance our shared mission," Zeldon wrote in an op-ed written for Newsweek and republished on the EPA's website. Part of that will also see the creation of a new Office of Clean Air Programs. The EPA also plans to begin consolidating staff to save on office space costs and prioritize approval of the use of certain chemicals currently under review. "Under the previous administration, EPA's buildings stood largely empty, with headquarters attendance peaking at just over one-third occupancy as the record high attendance day last year. Agency spending had ballooned from around $8 billion to $10 billion to more than $63 billion. Hundreds of new chemicals remained in regulatory limbo far beyond statutory review timelines, as did more than 12,000 pesticide reviews, and 685 State Implementation," Zeldin wrote. He pointed to some 504 new chemicals currently under EPA review beyond the statutorily required timeframe and more than 12,000 pesticides in a similar situation. "The American people deserve an EPA that effectively balances environmental protection with economic prosperity," Zeldin wrote. "Through this reorganization, we're positioning the agency to do just that."
The Hill
27-03-2025
- Business
- The Hill
Trump administration sets up portal for polluters to request exemptions to clean air rules
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has set up a portal allowing polluters to request exemptions to nine Clean Air Act rules. The Clean Air Act allows the president to exempt polluters from complying with regulations if he determines that the rules are based on technology that does not yet exist. The EPA posted online this week that it had set up an email address allowing companies to more easily request such presidential exemptions. The news comes after the EPA recently announced that it planned to roll back a large suite of Biden-era rules, including limits on mercury pollution from power plants and limits on emissions of cancer-causing ethylene oxide. Presidential exemptions could be a way to curtail rules like these while the lengthy legal and regulatory process plays out to formally overturn them. The EPA's notice said that requesting an exemption does not necessarily mean a company will get one and that President Trump will make a decision 'on the merits.' The New York Times first reported on the EPA's portal. Asked about the notice, an EPA spokesperson pointed out that the Biden administration had previously said it would consider exempting facilities from the ethylene oxide rule to prevent disruptions to supply chains for medical devices. The nine rules in question set limits on pollution from industries including sterilizers, iron and steel manufacturing, copper smelting, chemical manufacturing and coal plants. The notice comes after President Trump said last week that he plans to bolster coal power.
The Guardian
19-03-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
Trump administration may fire more than 1,000 EPA scientists and remove research office, Democrats say
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) plans to eliminate its scientific research office and could fire more than 1,000 scientists and other employees who help provide the scientific foundation for rules safeguarding human health and ecosystems from environmental pollutants. As many as 1,155 chemists, biologists, toxicologists and other scientists – 75% of the research programme's staff – could be laid off, according to documents reviewed by Democratic staff on the house committee on science, space and technology. The planned layoffs, cast by the Trump administration as part of a broader push to shrink the size of the federal government and make it more efficient, were assailed by critics as a massive dismantling of the EPA's longstanding mission to protect public health and the environment. The plans were first reported by the New York Times. EPA administrator Lee Zeldin has said he wants to eliminate 65% of the agency's budget, a huge spending cut that would require major staffing reductions for jobs such as monitoring air and water quality, responding to natural disasters and lead abatement, among many other agency functions. The EPA has also issued guidance directing that spending items greater than $50,000 require approval from Elon Musk's so-called ''department of government efficiency'. The Office of Research and Development – EPA's main science arm – currently has 1,540 positions, excluding special government employees and public health officers, according to one memo. A majority of staff – ranging from 50% to 75% – 'will not be retained', the memo says. The research office has 10 facilities across the country, stretching from Florida and North Carolina to Oregon. The plan calls for dissolving the research office and reassigning remaining staff to other parts of the agency 'to provide increased oversight and align with administration priorities,' the memo says. EPA officials have presented the plan to the White House for review. Molly Vaseliou, an EPA spokesperson, said the agency 'is taking exciting steps as we enter the next phase of organizational improvements,' but said changes had not been finalized. 'We are committed to enhancing our ability to deliver clean air, water and land for all Americans,' she said, adding, 'While no decisions have been made yet, we are actively listening to employees at all levels to gather ideas on how to increase efficiency and ensure the EPA is as up to date and effective as ever.' California congresswoman Zoe Lofgren, the top Democrat on the science committee, said in a statement that the agency's research office was created by Congress and 'eliminating it is illegal.' Every decision the EPA makes 'must be in furtherance of protecting human health and the environment, and that just can't happen if you gut EPA science,' Lofgren said. 'EPA cannot meet its legal obligation to use the best available science without (the Office of Research and Development) and that's the point,' she added. President Donald Trump and his billionaire adviser, Musk, 'are putting their polluter buddies' bottom lines over the health and safety of Americans,' Lofgren said. In his first term, 'Trump and his cronies politicised and distorted science,' she said. 'Now, this is their attempt to kill it for good.' Ticora Jones, chief science officer at the environmental group Natural Resources Defense Council, said Trump's EPA 'yet again is putting polluters over people.' She called on Congress to 'stand up and demand that EPA keep its scientists on the beat so that we all can get the clean air and clean water we need and deserve.'
Yahoo
14-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
How the EPA's environmental about-face could upend California's climate efforts
The Environmental Protection Agency's plan to repeal or weaken more than two dozen regulations could deliver a direct blow to California policies on air and water quality standards, electric vehicle initiatives and efforts to curb planet-harming greenhouse gas emissions. The changes announced this week are geared toward rolling back trillions of dollars in regulatory costs and hidden taxes on U.S. families, according to President Trump's new EPA administrator Lee Zeldin, who described the action on Wednesday as "the largest deregulatory announcement in U.S. history." But environmental groups were quick to condemn the plan as an abdication of the EPA's responsibilities to Americans. In climate-conscious California, they say, it could reverse decades of progress. "This isn't just a step backward — it's a wrecking ball aimed at decades of progress," said Guillermo Ortiz, senior clean vehicles advocate with the Natural Resources Defense Council. "California's leadership on clean energy and environmental justice is now directly under siege by the federal government." Among the 31 items up for reconsideration is the EPA's long-held conclusion that carbon dioxide emissions endanger human health and welfare, formally known as the "endangerment finding" established in 2009. California has been aggressive in its efforts to curb CO2, including a state law that requires a 40% emissions reduction by 2030 and an 85% reduction by 2045. The state aims to reach carbon neutrality by 2045 — five years sooner than the federal target set by the Biden administration. Zeldin referred to the endangerment finding as "the holy grail of the climate change religion." "We are driving a dagger straight into the heart of the climate change religion," he said. The EPA's plan also takes aim at the Clean Power Plan, an Obama- and Biden-era policy that seeks to slash emissions from power plants fueled by coal and natural gas, and at the mandatory greenhouse gas reporting program that compels approximately 8,000 large greenhouse gas emitters, such as power plants and factories, to report their emissions annually. California is home to nearly 400 of those reporting facilities, and has made gains in its efforts to reduce emissions in recent years. The state's facilities reported 92.1 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent emissions in 2023, compared with 116.1 million metric tons a decade prior. Repealing such programs — and potentially undermining the endangerment finding — would be akin to "denying the concept of gravity," Ortiz said. "It's not deregulation — it's science denial with a legal brief attached to it," he said. Read more: Trump's EPA takes steps to roll back dozens of environmental regulations But the EPA isn't focused only on emissions from large power plants and oil and gas producers. Also on the chopping block are rules that govern vehicle emissions, the largest source of air pollution in the Golden State. Among other changes, the EPA seeks to terminate the standards surrounding light-, medium- and heavy-duty vehicles that provided the foundation for Biden's electric vehicle mandate, which set a goal for EVs to comprise half the cars sold in the U.S. by 2030. Zeldin said the current federal rules impose more than $700 billion in regulatory and compliance costs, and that the EV mandate takes away Americans' ability to select the car of their choice while increasing the cost on all products delivered by trucks. California has set an even more aggressive target than the federal government on EV adoption, with Gov. Gavin Newsom's mandate banning the sale of gas cars by 2035 — a move the Trump administration has already set out to block. "California has been the leading state in advancing the clean transportation industry and market," said John Boesel, president of the clean transportation nonprofit CALSTART. Boesel noted that the EPA in January already failed to act on a plan known as the Advanced Clean Fleets rule, which would have helped phase out heavy-duty diesel trucks in the state. But the new changes could create even more hurdles for California's EV transition by potentially compromising federal tax incentives, hindering the expansion of a national charging infrastructure and encouraging fossil fuel production. "A lot of hard work went into developing the regulations and setting a direction for the future of the United States, and many companies have made major investments in a cleaner transportation future," Boesel said. "Having this kind of regulatory uncertainty will undermine a lot of the investment and possibly discourage innovation." Read more: Trump, congressional Republicans seek to block California's 2035 ban on gas-powered vehicles Mike Stoker, who served as the EPA's top official for California and the Pacific Southwest during the previous Trump administration, downplayed the impact on California, however, saying the Golden State can continue to set higher standards than the federal government. "As a general matter, most of the states that have been really strong on the environment, like California, are going to exceed whatever the minimum standard is that the EPA is regulating," he said, adding that "these kind of actions have a much bigger impact on the states that have really opted to go with more the minimum standards." The goal, he said, is to eliminate rules and regulations that are costly and time consuming and to ensure that those that remain are backed up by the best possible science. Stoker also said the deregulation announcement is not taking direct aim at electric vehicles, but rather is geared toward letting consumers dictate the marketplace. "Their message is they don't want the government to subsidize making electric cars happen before the market really demands it," he said. But federal rules don't exist in a vacuum, said Ortiz, of the NRDC. The 31 regulatory actions are also occurring alongside job cuts and efforts to curtail California's authority to set tailpipe emissions. What's more, carbon dioxide and other pollutants have no regard for state lines. "California's climate goals and our air quality progress have been a beacon for the world, and gutting these EPA rules is like punching holes in that lighthouse," Ortiz said. "We're talking about more asthma in Fresno, we're talking about deadlier wildfires, and we're stalling out the EV transition that's been occurring." Read more: 'Drill baby drill': Trump takes aim at clean energy, climate change and the environment on day one The EPA's plan also takes aim at other issues that are popular in California, including environmental justice and air and water quality standards. The agency seeks to terminate its environmental justice and diversity, equity and inclusion arms, Zeldin said. California — home to some of the worst air quality in the world — has for decades worked to rectify inequities that have left the state's low-income communities and communities of color disproportionately burdened by pollution, extreme heat, wildfire smoke and other environmental challenges, and experts fear that changes at the federal level could exacerbate those issues. Indeed, Zeldin said the agency will reconsider air toxic standards that target coal-fired plants, as well as National Ambient Air Quality Standards that regulate six harmful pollutants. Those pollutants include particulate matter 2.5, or sooty material that is released from vehicles, industrial smokestacks and wildfires. PM 2.5 was among the top air quality concerns in the wake of January's firestorm in Los Angeles. Only a year ago, the Biden administration's EPA tightened the rules around particulate matter in a move it said would prevent thousands of premature deaths. What's more, some of the state's hard-won gains on water quality could be undone by the EPA's plan to revise the definition "waters of the United States" as it applies to the federal Clean Water Act of 1972. The rules govern water quality as well as discharge requirements for farmers, landowners and businesses, which Zeldin said place an undue burden on Americans and drive up the cost of doing business. Opponents said loosening such guidelines could leave water systems more vulnerable to dangerous pollutants and discharge, especially in the wake of a recent Supreme Court decision that limited federal protections for wetlands in favor of property rights. "We cannot sit idly by while the U.S. Supreme Court, and now the Federal Administration, take calculated steps to compromise the federal Clean Water Act and the protections it has provided for decades," state Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica) said in a statement. Allen recently introduced legislation that would enshrine into state law the previous federal protections removed by the Supreme Court. The lack of these and other protections could threaten the health and well-being of millions of Californians, he said. But experts cautioned that the EPA's proposed changes cannot be imposed unilaterally, and said due process must include scientific and legal justification for each decision, as well as listening and responding to public feedback. It is likely that many of the changes will face lengthy legal challenges from opposition groups. Boesel, of CALSTART, said he remains optimistic that California will continue to make progress on climate change despite the potentially bumpy road ahead. But he underscored that it is important for the EPA to continue to show leadership at a national and global level. "The United States represents about 5% of the world's population and generates nearly 20% of the world's greenhouse gas emissions," he said. "So the United States really needs to be a global team player and do what it can to avert a climate disaster." This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Yahoo
14-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Maps show support for climate policies, as EPA rolls back protections
The Environmental Protection Agency announced Wednesday that it will roll back or change 31 environmental rules and regulations. Some of these changes include revisions of national air quality standards for particulate matter, emission standards for industrial air pollutants and regulations restricting vehicle emissions. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said the deregulation will drive "a dagger straight into the heart of the climate change religion to drive down cost of living for American families, unleash American energy, bring auto jobs back to the U.S. and more." But a new update to the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication's Climate Opinion Maps suggests most Americans support at least some environmental regulation. Yale's study is based on estimates from large national surveys totaling more than 32,000 people between November 2008 and December 2024. Some questions have been included since the beginning, but Yale researchers also added questions over the years. Nationally, they found an estimated 2 out of 3 Americans support the U.S. economy transitioning from fossil fuels to 100% clean energy by 2050 — a newly added measurement in the 2024 update. An even higher share, about 3 out of 4, support regulating carbon emissions and funding research into renewable energy. Support for these policies is typically lower in more rural states and counties. In Wyoming, for example, an estimated 43% support a full transition to clean energy — one of three states where fewer than half of adults support this policy. By comparison, 3 out of 4 adults in Maryland, Vermont and Massachusetts support a full transition to clean energy, higher than the national average. In every state and county in the U.S., the Yale study found more than half of Americans support regulating carbon emissions and funding research into renewable energy. Yale's study also found that about 63% of Americans say they are "worried" about global warming and believe it will harm people in the U.S. These opinions also vary by geography, with more people in urban areas saying they are worried about global warming. Nationally, a majority of people believe government officials should do more to address climate change. However, more people wanted action from people and companies than from government. See the differences below on where people are looking for action. Trump reacts to European Union slapping tariffs on U.S. goods Kentucky bourbon maker says Trump tariffs immediately impacted his business Woman charged after allegedly holding her stepson captive for more than 20 years
