The Trump Administration is taking dead aim at regulations that protect people’s lives, livelihoods and communities -- including regulations that protect our health and environment. Fortunately, no president can roll back regulations by fiat. Trump officials must go through the same process that’s used for making regulations. That process gives everyone the opportunity to be heard.
This Save EPA web site has resources to help you oppose proposed rule rollbacks:
- "A Practical Guide for Resisting the Trump De-Regulatory Agenda" describes how to fight rule rollbacks by commenting during the federal rule-making process, enlisting members of Congress, and taking other actions. Learn more about the guide and download your own PDF copy here.
- EPA rollback proposals now open for comment are listed below. We also list closely related rollback proposals of other federal agencies.
- Rollback fact sheets with talking points are posted for many rollback actions. Each fact sheet describes the rule at risk, the Trump Administration's proposed rollback, and suggested points to make in opposing the rollback. For rollbacks currently open for comment, the fact sheet also includes the comment deadline, information on how to submit your comments, and a link for online submission. Find all the fact sheets by going to the menu bar at the top of any Save EPA web page, clicking "Fighting Rule Rollbacks" and hovering your mouse pointer over "Rules Under Attack."
- Want the big picture? See Save EPA's "List of Trump Administration Rollback Actions: EPA Rules and Closely Related Rules." It includes planned, current and past actions.
- Finally, these links make it easy to write your members of Congress (your representative in the House of Representatives and your two senators). If you're willing to register with Countable, this link -- https://www.countable.us/ -- allows you to identify your members of Congress and send a message to all three at once. Or, you can write them separately -- you can use https://whoismyrepresentative.com/ or https://www.usa.gov/elected-officials/ to find your members' email contact forms or snail mail addresses. See the guide for more help.
Sign up for Save EPA Email Alerts -- and Take Action!
Rules Now Open For Comment
The Trump Administration has targeted many EPA regulations to be weakened or outright eliminated. Also targeted are related rules of other agencies. Save EPA is tracking these actions, and providing talking points to help commenters who want to resist the Trump agenda. As the people these regulations are designed to protect, we need to be loud and clear that these protections are important to us. We can’t afford to be silent while President Trump tries to take the U.S.A. backwards to a time of dirty air, polluted waters and contaminated land.
Comment period extended through October 26, 2018
The Trump Administration is proposing to weaken critically important standards for climate pollution and fuel economy from new cars, SUVs and light trucks, which account for around 20% of climate pollution in the U.S. These vehicles are second only to electric utilities in the amount of climate pollution they emit. In addition to combatting climate change, these standards save drivers money at the gas pump and promote the nation's energy independence.
The proposal also would withdraw a 2013 EPA waiver that allows California to have stricter standards than the federal government for three clean car programs, including the state's GHG standards that apply to model year 2021 through 2025 vehicles. In addition to taking away California's authority to impose those requirements, the proposal would take away other states' ability to adopt those California requirements.
NHTSA and EPA will jointly hold three public hearings on the proposal -- on September 24 in Fresno, California; on September 25 in Dearborn, Michigan; and on September 26 in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Those who would like to speak at the hearings are asked to notify agency contacts 10 days in advance.
For information on the existing standards, proposed rollback, and how to comment and participate in the public hearings -- including suggested talking points -- see Trump Administration Proposes to Roll Back Climate Pollution and Fuel Economy Standards for Cars and Light Trucks.
Comment by October 30, 2018
The Trump Administration has proposed a replacement rule for the Clean Power Plan that would achieve relatively little reduction in climate pollution and would result in higher levels of traditional air pollution, setting a course that would leave in jeopardy the health and welfare of the American people and people around the globe.
The ACE proposal, like CPP, would set requirements for control of heat-trapping carbon dioxide (CO2) pollution from coal- and gas-fired power plants. Together these plants represent one of the two largest sources of CO2 in the United States. A U.S. failure to take strong action to reduce emissions would invite other nations to shirk their responsibility to cut emissions to help reduce this global threat.
Like CPP, the ACE proposal would set federal guidelines for state emissions standards. States would be required to develop their own plans and submit them to EPA for approval. If EPA determined that a state plan was not satisfactory, EPA could impose a federal plan. But there are important differences between CPP and ACE, and every one of those differences serve to make ACE much weaker than CPP. GHG reductions are inadequate. Reduction in emissions of conventional pollutants also is trivial compared to CPP. There will be more lost lives, illnesses, property damage, and environmental damage from climate pollution and other air pollution if CPP is replaced with this rule. It will not encourage more efficient use of electricity. It will not encourage the use of cleaner methods of electricity generation. It will not reduce consumer electricity bills over time.
For more information on the Trump Administration proposal and how to submit comments -- including suggested points to make -- see A Poor Replacement for the Clean Power Plan: ACE.
Comment by November 15, 2018EPA is proposing to rollback controls on extremely powerful climate pollutants used in refrigeration equipment. Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) are 1,430 times more potent than carbon dioxide in warming the atmosphere. EPA’s original rule extended controls on substances that deplete stratospheric ozone to HFCs, a substitute for those substances, to reduce emissions of both pollutants. Trump’s EPA is now concerned that EPA overstepped its legal authority in applying the controls to HFCs, but has proposed no alternative means of reducing emissions of these powerful climate-changing pollutants. In a recent report commissioned by the United Nations, an international group of climate experts warns that we only have 10 years to take the additional steps needed to avoid the worst effects of climate change. Now is not the time to be rolling back controls on climate pollution without replacing them with something as effective, or better yet, more effective. For more information on the 2016 refrigerant rule, the Trump Administration's proposed rollback, and how to comment -- including suggested talking points -- see Proposed Rollback of Controls on Hugely Potent Climate Pollutants -- HFCs.
Comment by December 17, 2018
EPA has proposed to weaken standards issued in 2016 that were designed to significantly reduce climate-changing methane and other air pollution from the oil and gas industry. Although some of the proposed changes clarify provisions of the 2016 rule, key provisions reduce the frequency of monitoring emissions and provide more time before leaks must be repaired. The result would be to increase emissions of methane, smog-forming volatile organic compounds, and toxic air pollutants.
The standards apply to new, reconstructed and modified processes and equipment used in oil and natural gas extraction and production. The proposed changes would save the oil and gas industry up to $85 million annually or up to $484 million over the 2019-2025 time period. EPA estimates that the public would forgo up to $54 million in benefits over that time. But this figure is greatly underestimated. EPA did not count damage to public health and the environment from the effects of climate change beyond US borders, where most of the world’s population lives; from increased ozone smog formation due to increased methane and VOC emissions; or from increased air toxics emissions. In other words, EPA did not count most of the forgone benefits from this action.
For more information on the existing rule, the proposed rollback, and how to comment -- including suggested talking points -- see Defending EPA Methane Standards for the Oil and Gas Industry.