-
Comments to EPA on Its Proposed Maximum Containment Levels for PFAS
In 2024, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) set Maximum Contaminant Levels for six types of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Policy Integrity submitted a comment letter regarding EPA’s proposal to allow certain public water systems to request an additional two years to meet the standards for perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid.
-
Amicus Brief on the FDA’s Removal of the In-Person Dispensing Requirement for Mifepristone
In 2023, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) modified its Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies for mifepristone to remove an in-person dispensing requirement (2023 REMS). That action is the subject of this litigation, in which Louisiana argues that the 2023 REMS was arbitrary and capricious. Following the change in presidential administration, the FDA chose not to defend the action on the merits. Instead, in September 2025, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and then-FDA Commissioner Martin A. Makary stated that the FDA’s decision suffered from a “lack of adequate consideration” and announced that it would reconsider the 2023 REMS. Our amicus brief, filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, explains that these statements should receive no weight in the Court’s analysis because they postdate the agency’s decision, are outside the administrative record, and are conclusory and fail to grapple with the agency’s prior findings.
-
Fact Sheet: Enduring Federal Obligations to Account for Environmental Justice
Federal agencies routinely issue rules or grant permits or licenses with implications for environmental justice. Until recently, agencies followed an established framework to consider those implications as part of their decisions. This analytical architecture has vanished under the second Trump Administration. While significant, the developments under this administration do not change the binding legal obligations that agencies face. In this fact sheet, we outline principles that may be relevant for affected parties when an agency acts without considering impacts on environmental justice.
-
New York’s Climate Law Amendments Usher in New Challenges and Opportunities
Many see the recent changes to New York’s Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA) as a retreat from New York’s climate ambition. But the recent CLCPA amendments could still allow for a cost-effective and robust program to reduce New York's greenhouse gas emissions—if the state acts promptly and seizes all available opportunities to enable effective emissions reductions.
-
Comments to EPA About Its Proposed Hydrofluorocarbon Leak-Repair Exemption for Certain Refrigerators
In 2024, EPA promulgated a final rule, Phasedown of Hydrofluorocarbons: Management of Certain Hydrofluorocarbons and Substitutes Under the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act of 2020. The 2024 Rule instituted leak-repair requirements for certain refrigerant-containing appliances containing hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) or equivalents. HFCs are potent greenhouse gases (GHGs). EPA now apparently seeks to categorically exempt 360,000 road and intermodal container transport refrigeration units from the 2024 Rule’s leak-repair requirements. This letter identifies three legal flaws in the Proposed Rule.
-
Nobody Wants This: Essentially No Experts Advised Retaining Old Discount Rates
Working Paper
Contrary to the suggestion that the 2023 update to the Office of Management and Budget’s Circular A-4 “ignored [a] consensus” favoring higher discount rates, the positions of the nine peer reviewers on the 2023 update were much more nuanced and diverse. Yet ironically, to the extent almost all reviews might have agreed on at least one point, it is this: virtually nobody favored the course of action now adopted by the Trump Administration, of simply retaining the twenty-year-old, outdated guidance on discounting without any updates.
-
Comments to EPA on Weakening Emissions Standards for Light-And Medium-Duty Vehicles
In 2024, EPA updated its emissions standards for light- and medium-duty vehicles. These included more protective standards for smog- and soot-forming pollutants. EPA now seeks to weaken these life-saving limits on smog- and soot-forming emissions for two model years of covered vehicles, while noting that amendments to standards for future model years “will be proposed separately.” We submitted comments, along with our partners at Clean Air Task Force, Environmental Defense Fund, Montana Environmental Information Center, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, and Union of Concerned Scientists, explaining that EPA’s new claim that these estimates are too uncertain is flawed for numerous reasons.
-
Practical Reforms for Swifter, Stronger Federal Rulemaking
This article highlights a range of opportunities to refine the federal rulemaking process. These measures, by streamlining and speeding rulemakings, can help support more durable policymaking by increasing the likelihood that final rules will complete judicial review in one term and avoid congressional repeal.
-
Comments to the Department of Energy on Its Sunset Rule
In May, the Department of Energy (DOE) issued proposed and direct final rules inserting a conditional sunset date into certain DOE regulations. DOE claimed that the sunsetting of these regulations was in response to Executive Order 14,270, "Zero-Based Regulatory Budgeting to Unleash American Energy." Our comments highlight problems with DOE's rule: the sunset process bypasses both meaningful public input and true consideration of whether the sunsets comport with statutory mandates or improve overall public welfare.
-
Hidden Hazards
How EPA Is Obscuring Toxic Chemical Risks Through Flawed Analysis
In this issue brief, we examine recent steps EPA has taken to warp its approach to risk evaluation under the Toxic Substances Control Act, the law that charges EPA with setting standards to address health and safety risks posed by toxic chemicals. In particular, we focus on two recent moves: (1) amendments to EPA’s final risk evaluation for formaldehyde, and (2) proposed changes to a foundational rule that governs how EPA conducts risk evaluations—known as the Framework Rule. In both, EPA makes a series of unsupported changes that will bias the agency’s analysis of the scope of risks from toxic chemicals and how best to address them. These moves will inevitably tee up flawed decisions and weak standards that fail to protect the public against dangerous chemicals.





_200_200_90_s_c1.jpg)


