In a significant regulatory rollback, the Trump administration has moved to dismantle a key Obama-era environmental program, The Daily Caller reported.
The proposed removal of the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program is anticipated to save American companies billions in compliance costs.The Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP), implemented during the Obama administration, began data collection in 2010. Funded initially by Congress with $3.5 million under the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008, the program was designed to gather emissions data from large facilities and suppliers.
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced the proposal last Friday, targeting the elimination of mandatory greenhouse gas emissions reporting for certain sectors. This move has been anticipated as part of a broader shift in environmental regulations under the current administration.
If the rule is finalized, it would relieve large facilities, fuel suppliers, and CO2 injection sites of their reporting duties. The implications of this deregulation could significantly impact how environmental data is collected and utilized in policymaking.
Zeldin has previously maneuvered to reduce environmental regulations, following his July proposal to retract the 2009 Endangerment Finding. This finding, vital during Obama's tenure, enforced strict emissions regulations on power plants.
By lifting these reporting requirements, the administration argues that it could foster economic growth by reducing overhead costs for businesses. The estimated savings from the abolition of GHGRP amount to as much as $2.4 billion in compliance expenditures.
In discussing the initiative, Zeldin framed the reporting program as bureaucratic overreach that stifles American industry without yielding significant environmental or health benefits. “Alongside President Trump, EPA continues to live up to the promise of unleashing energy dominance that powers the American Dream,” Zeldin remarked.
The proposal remains in the federal rulemaking process, requiring public commentary before it can be enacted. This period allows stakeholders and citizens to voice their support or concerns regarding the proposed changes.
While the EPA under Zeldin argues that the reporting program has no material impact on environmental quality, this position is contested by environmental groups. They claim the data is crucial for understanding and managing greenhouse gas emissions effectively.
“Instead, it costs American businesses and manufacturing billions of dollars, driving up the cost of...
The EPA statement highlighted on Friday also claimed, “Unlike other mandatory information collections under the CAA, the GHGRP is not directly related to a potential regulation and has no material impact on improving human health and the environment.”
The decision to potentially end GHGRP fits into a pattern of similar regulatory rollbacks aiming at boosting economic performance by reducing bureaucratic constraints. This approach has been a hallmark of Zeldin's tenure as EPA Administrator.
Critics, however, warn that stripping away such programs could hinder national efforts to monitor and combat climate change. They argue that accurate, comprehensive data collection is essential for informed environmental decision-making.
As discussions unfold and the public comment period progresses, the fate of the GHGRP and its role in U.S. environmental policy continues to hang in the balance, highlighting a pivotal moment in the nation's regulatory landscape.
