EPA Enforcement Actions Under Scrutiny Amid Policy Shift
The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) approach to enforcing environmental regulations is facing significant changes under the current administration. This shift raises concerns about the future of ongoing pollution investigations and the agency’s core mission.
Ongoing Investigations Facing Uncertainty
Several high-profile environmental investigations initiated under the previous administration are now in a precarious position. These include:
- New Mexico Refinery: A refinery in New Mexico accused by the federal government of generating some of the nation’s worst air contamination.
- Louisiana Chemical Plant: A chemical facility in Louisiana under investigation for alleged gas leaks from its storage tanks.
- Idaho Ranchers: Ranchers in Idaho facing accusations of polluting wetlands.
These cases exemplify the EPA’s previous assertive stance on environmental enforcement, where the agency actively investigated companies for infractions related to contamination, hazardous waste, and other violations.
Policy Reversal: Prioritizing Economy Over Enforcement?
A recent EPA memo indicates a significant departure from this approach. The memo outlines key changes in enforcement priorities, signaling a potential weakening of environmental protection measures.
Key Changes in EPA Enforcement
According to the March 12 memo, EPA enforcement actions will now be curtailed to prevent disruptions to any stage of energy production, unless there is an “imminent health threat.” This directive also effectively halts initiatives aimed at addressing disproportionately high pollution levels in disadvantaged communities.
vCard.red is a free platform for creating a mobile-friendly digital business cards. You can easily create a vCard and generate a QR code for it, allowing others to scan and save your contact details instantly.
The platform allows you to display contact information, social media links, services, and products all in one shareable link. Optional features include appointment scheduling, WhatsApp-based storefronts, media galleries, and custom design options.
The memo explicitly states that “no consideration” should be given to whether affected populations are minority or low-income groups.
EPA Administrator Justifies Shift
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin defended these changes, asserting they would enable the agency to “better focus on its core mission and powering the Great American Comeback.”
Critics Warn of Public Harm
David Uhlmann, former enforcement chief at the EPA under the prior administration, criticized the memo, stating it effectively signals that the EPA “does not intend to hold [companies] accountable” for breaking environmental laws, particularly within the oil and gas sector.
Uhlmann warned that this policy shift would endanger communities nationwide, especially vulnerable areas with minority or low-income populations that disproportionately suffer from pollution.
EPA and Justice Department Response
EPA spokesperson Molly Vaseliou declined to comment on ongoing investigations. The Department of Justice, also facing resource constraints, similarly declined to comment.
Arguments for Deregulation
Conservative voices argue that EPA regulations impede economic expansion and investment. Grover Norquist, President of Americans for Tax Reform, contends that “bold deregulatory action at E.P.A. will unleash American energy and reduce costs for American families,” viewing it as a dismantling of excessive government regulation.
Ongoing Legal Battles and Shifting Priorities
While previous enforcement cases continue to proceed through the legal system, a broader re-evaluation of the EPA’s fundamental purpose is underway. This shift comes after the agency’s creation half a century ago, under President Richard M. Nixon, with a clear mandate to safeguard the environment and public health.
The current administration has signaled its intention to roll back numerous significant environmental rules, including pollution limits for vehicles and industrial facilities, as well as wetland protections.
Redefined EPA Mission
In a video message, Administrator Zeldin articulated the agency’s revised mission as focusing on “lower[ing] the cost of buying a car, heating a home and running a business.”
Further underscoring this shift, “Project 2025,” a policy blueprint with input from current administration officials, proposes eliminating the EPA office responsible for enforcement and compliance. Administrator Zeldin has also expressed intentions to drastically reduce the agency’s budget and eliminate its scientific research branch.
Enforcement Activities Already Impacted
Reports indicate that on-site inspections, crucial for enforcement investigations, are already facing delays and suspensions, with air pollution-related investigations being particularly affected.
A notable instance of this policy change is the recent withdrawal of a federal lawsuit against Denka Performance Elastomer, a chemical manufacturer in Louisiana previously accused of emitting high levels of a potentially carcinogenic substance.
Case Dropped Amid Policy Changes
The lawsuit against Denka was initially filed by the previous administration due to concerns that chloroprene emissions were contributing to elevated cancer risks in communities along the Mississippi River.
Historical Parallels and Future Concerns
William K. Reilly, former EPA administrator under President George H.W. Bush, voiced concern about potential severe environmental consequences, referencing the infamous Cuyahoga River fire that spurred environmental awareness in the 1960s.
Environmental law expert Ann E. Carlson warns that while the EPA reiterates its commitment to imminent health threats, the long-term dangers of pollution, such as increased cancer rates and respiratory illnesses, are being downplayed.
Carlson characterizes the current policy shift as a tacit approval for coal and oil industries to pollute with near impunity.
Enforcement Successes Under Previous Administration
The policy reversal marks a stark contrast to the previous administration’s efforts to strengthen EPA enforcement. In 2024, the EPA achieved high levels of civil case conclusions and penalty collections, alongside criminal charges, demonstrating a proactive approach to environmental protection.
Prioritized areas included greenhouse gas emissions, PFAS “forever chemicals,” and coal ash disposal, reflecting a comprehensive environmental protection agenda.
Shift Away from Key Environmental Threats
The recent EPA memo signals a pullback from focusing on both coal ash disposal and methane emissions from oil and gas operations, reversing previous priorities.
Ongoing settlement discussions from the prior administration, such as the case involving the HF Sinclair refinery in New Mexico accused of benzene pollution, are now uncertain.
Uncertainty Surrounds Settlements and New Cases
A proposed settlement for the HF Sinclair refinery, intended to protect the community of Artesia, New Mexico, remains unfinalized under the new administration.
HF Sinclair stated they have already invested in improvements to address pollution concerns. The New Mexico Department of Environmental Quality expressed support for the settlement but acknowledged uncertainty due to the federal administrative change.
New investigations, like the one initiated at a Shell refinery and chemical plant in Louisiana following the discovery of leaks and violations in March 2023, face even greater ambiguity.
The EPA has not confirmed whether the Shell investigation is ongoing, and Shell declined to comment.
Broader Legal and Regulatory Landscape
The evolving legal and regulatory landscape, including Supreme Court rulings affecting federal authority over waterways, further complicates environmental enforcement.
A case involving Idaho ranchers accused of wetlands violations illustrates these complexities. While a judge initially dismissed the case based on a Supreme Court ruling, a revised lawsuit was filed. However, the current administration’s stance could influence the case’s outcome.
An attorney representing the ranchers anticipates their arguments will prevail, irrespective of new EPA rule revisions, but acknowledges the potential impact of the administration’s changed perspective.