Legal fight brewing over latest Trump air pollution plans
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Illustration: Tiffany Herring/Axios
Environmental groups are signaling potential lawsuits over EPA's decision not to put monetary estimates on the health benefits of curbing critical forms of air pollution.
State of play: EPA revealed its approach in publishing a new rule for power turbines, which shies away from "monetizing benefits" of avoiding fine particulate and ozone pollution.
Friction point: Multiple groups call the approach harmful, saying EPA is failing to properly consider benefits of avoiding premature death, preventing asthma and more.
- "The Trump EPA's policy that assigns no value to protecting the health of the American people from deadly soot and smog is unlawful," Vickie Patton, general counsel for the Environmental Defense Fund, said in a statement to Axios.
- Groups including the Sierra Club and Natural Resources Defense Council also called the approach illegal.
The other side: The turbine rule says EPA will hold back from calculating monetary benefits until it's "confident enough in the modeling" to do it properly.
- "Not monetizing DOES NOT equal not considering or not valuing the human health impact. EPA is fully committed to its core mission of protect[ing] human health and the environment," an EPA spokesperson said via email.
- The agency is working to enhance its methods, it said.
What we're watching: Whether this fight moves from the regulatory into the legal realm.
- But attorney Jeff Holmstead, a senior EPA air official in George W. Bush's administration, said the Clean Air Act doesn't force EPA to monetize benefits, nor do any court decisions.
- "I don't think the decision to stop this practice will create any legal problems for them, as long as they provide a reasoned explanation for their decisions and a discussion of the benefits," Holmstead, a partner with Bracewell LLC, said via email.
Sign up here for Axios' Future of Energy newsletter.
