August 3, 2020 – Today, the Clinic submitted comments on behalf of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation and the National Parks Conservation Association on the Environmental Protection Agency’s Proposed Rule “Increasing Consistency and Transparency in Considering Benefits and Costs in the Clean Air Act Rulemaking Process.” The comments urge EPA to withdraw the Proposed Rule in light of the agency’s lack of authority to promulgate the Rule under Section 301 of the Clean Air Act, including because there is no demonstrated need for the Proposed Rule and because the Proposed Rule would encode value judgments that substantively affect public and private parties.
The comments provide examples of how the Proposed Rule would undermine environmental protections and the existing regulatory programs that are essential to public health, protection of ecosystems and wildlife, and local economies, and would push additional compliance obligations onto states and private parties. The Proposed Rule also fails to identify or assess how these impacts would affect environmental health and safety risks in vulnerable populations.
The comments were prepared by Senior Clinical Instructor and Staff Attorney Aladdine Joroff and Clinic student Sarah Douglas (JD ’21).
Click here to read the comments: Comments On Proposed Rule: “Increasing Consistency and Transparency in Considering Benefits and Costs In The Clean Air Act Rulemaking Process,” 85 Fed. Reg 35,612, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2020-0044
Click below for press releases from the Chesapeake Bay Foundation and the National Parks Conservation Association: