The top Senate Republican overseeing EPA says the Trump administration’s move to roll back the scientific finding that undergirds climate change regulations will be difficult.
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said Administrator Lee Zeldin’s plan to challenge the endangerment finding — which gives the agency its authority to regulate greenhouse gases by finding they threaten public health — would be more complicated than a litany of other potential regulatory rollbacks the EPA chief announced Wednesday.
“I think that one is more complicated, to be honest with you, because of the court rulings that led to that,” Capito told POLITICO’s E&E News.
When asked whether the result of the 2007 Massachusetts v. EPA Supreme Court case would make it difficult for Zeldin to legally overturn the endangerment finding, Capito responded, “I think that’s why I said it’s more complicated.”
Massachusetts v. EPA established that EPA had the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions because they are air pollutants under the Clean Air Act.
That led to the EPA’s 2009 endangerment finding, which concluded that the emissions endanger public health and welfare and could be regulated under the Clean Air Act.
President Donald Trump formally asked Zeldin to consider whether to rework or scrap the finding hours after he was inaugurated in January.
On Wednesday, Zeldin confirmed reporting from February that he would target the “holy grail” finding, along with dozens of other rules.
“Today’s momentous day also includes the 2009 endangerment finding, along with all actions that rely on it,” Zeldin said in a video. “I’ve been told the endangerment finding is considered the ‘holy grail’ of the climate change religion.”
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) called the endangerment ruling “the most important environmental decision in the history of the United States.”
Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse — Capito’s counterpart as the top Democrat on the Environment Committee — slammed the Wednesday announcement and accused Zeldin of lying to the panel.
“I think you saw about as clear an example today from Lee Zeldin that he lied to us in his confirmation hearings as you could possibly want, which is a disappointment, but not a surprise, because this entire administration has been corruptly for sale to the worst elements of the fossil fuel industry all along,” Whitehouse told reporters.
He argued EPA will face “huge problems” if it tries to repeal the endangerment finding, particularly because of Administrative Procedure Act requirements.
Whitehouse did not specify how he believes Zeldin lied. The topic of the endangerment finding came up in his January confirmation hearing, but he did not promise to keep the finding in place.
At the hearing, Zeldin pushed back at Markey’s attempts to get him to agree that EPA is “obligated” under the ruling to regulate greenhouse gases.
He said the decision is subject to EPA’s discretion and that the agency is simply “authorized” to regulate the gases.
“The decision does not require the EPA, it authorizes the EPA,” Zeldin said of the 2007 ruling. “It doesn’t say that ‘you are obligated to,’ and that’s it. There are steps that EPA would have to take in order for an obligation to be created.”
Many Republicans, however, have cheered news of the administration moving to undo the endangerment finding. Without it, EPA would not need to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants and other sources.
Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.) in February alluded to the challenges mentioned by Capito but thought the administration would prevail on the merits. She said it would be hard to defend the use of the finding because of its far-reaching effect on several sectors.
Capito appears to be the only Capitol Hill Republican so far to publicly express at least some skepticism with Zeldin’s endangerment move.
She did express broad support for the other EPA rollbacks proposed Wednesday. They include actions done because of the endangerment finding.
“I’m glad to see them moving in the direction of eliminating what I think are overdone regulations that don’t really accomplish anything,” Capito said. “And so, by and large, I’m pleased with the action.”
