Menu
Institute for Policy Integrity logo

Recent Projects

Viewing recent projects in EPA
  • Comments to EPA on Risk Management Program Revisions

    The Institute for Policy Integrity submitted comments to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regarding its proposed revisions to the Risk Management Program (RMP), under Section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act. EPA’s new proposal will better protect communities from chemical accidents that release toxic air pollution. Policy Integrity recommended that EPA further strengthen its regulatory impact analysis, including its consideration of unquantified benefits and the distribution of benefits and costs between fenceline communities and facilities. In particular, EPA should strengthen its breakeven analysis by better considering how risk mitigation measures decrease the magnitude of accidents and avoid the most-costly accidents or catastrophes. EPA should also clarify its new language concerning climate-related hazards and provide complementary guidance to ensure robust consideration of climate-related hazards by RMP facilities.

    Read more

  • Comments to EPA on its Proposed Asbestos Risk Management Rule

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed a ban on multiple conditions of use of chrysotile asbestos. The Institute for Policy Integrity and Professor Rachel Rothschild at the University of Michigan Law School submitted comments on the agency’s economic analysis of the proposed rule, identifying numerous ways EPA underestimated the health benefits from reduced cancer cases and lung illnesses and could strengthen the robust scientific, economic and legal basis for EPA’s proposed rule.

    Read more

  • Comments to EPA on Proposed Transport Rule

    In April 2022, EPA proposed a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to reduce interstate transport of ozone pollution using the Clean Air Act's Good Neighbor Provision. We submitted comments supporting the Proposed FIP and recomming that EPA select the regulatory alternative that maximizes net benefits and revise and expand its distributional analysis to better reflect the impacts of the Proposed FIP on vulnerable groups. We also submitted joint comments with a coalition of environmental groups supporting EPA's use of the social cost of greenhouse gases in the Proposed FIP.

    Read more

  • Comments to EPA on Proposed Heavy-Duty Vehicle Emission Standards

    In March 2022, EPA proposed standards to regulate emissions of nitrogen oxides and particulate matter from heavy-duty vehicles beginning with Model Year 2027. Policy Integrity submitted comments recommending that EPA strengthen these crucial standards in order to fulfill EPA's statutory duty to set standards "reflecting the greatest degree of emission reduction achievable." We also made a number of recommendations designed to ensure that EPA is properly comparing regulatory alternatives and accounting for the benefits of strong regulation.

    Read more

  • Comments to EPA on Proposal to Reaffirm “Appropriate-and-Necessary” Finding for Regulating Hazardous Air Pollution from Power Plants

    In February 2022, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed: (1) to revoke its May 2020 finding that it is not appropriate and necessary to regulate coal- and oil-fired electric utility steam generating units (EGUs) under Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 112 (2020 Action), and (2) to reaffirm the Agency's April 2016 finding that it remains appropriate and necessary to regulate hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions from EGUs after considering cost (2016 Supplemental Finding). Our comments on the Proposal explain why EPA should finalize both these actions as consistent with the Clean Air Act, case law, executive directives, principles of sound economic analysis, and past agency practice.

    Read more

  • Comments to EPA on Proposed Particulate Matter Standards for Aircraft Emissions

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently proposed airplane pollution standards that will have no effect on emissions and require no technological improvements. We filed comments urging EPA to evaluate a full suite of regulatory alternatives, including more stringent standards that would reduce emissions, and recommend that EPA conduct a distributional analysis to evaluate the impacts of the Proposed Rule and the relative distributional consequences for each regulatory alternative.

    These comments were co-written with Clinical Associates Jenna Pearlson and Tanya Shahjanian.

    Read more

  • Comments to EPA on Oil and Gas Sector Methane Standards

    In November 2021, EPA proposed standards to regulate methane emissions from new and existing sources in the oil and natural gas sector. Policy Integrity submitted comments supporting the proposed standards, and recommending that EPA strengthen its proposal by regulating additional leaky sources; conducting a distributional analysis of the rule's expected impacts; extending the time frame of its analysis; quantifying co-benefits; and disaggregating costs and benefits to demonstrate that its proposed standards are both individually and cumulatively net beneficial.

    We also submitted joint comments with a coalition of other environmental groups on EPA's use of the social cost of greenhouse gases (SC-GHG) in its proposed regulation, recommending that the agency expand its justification of its discount rates and inclusion of global damages in the SC-GHG, and affirm that the SC-GHG is a lower bound of projected climate impacts.

    Read more

  • Comments to EPA on New Clean Car Standards

    We submitted comments on the Environmental Protection Agency’s (“EPA”) notice of proposed rulemaking, Revised 2023 and Later Model Year Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards. Our comment urged EPA to: select the regulatory alternative that will maximize net social welfare and promote distributional justice; rely on legislative and regulatory history to help justify its aproach to lead time; and improve its modeling to more fully capture benefits of stronger standards.

    We also submitted joint comments with a coalition of other environmental groups on EPA's use of the social cost of carbon (SCC) in its proposed regulation, recommending that the agency expand its justification its discount rates and inclusion of global damages in the SCC, and affirm that the SCC is a lower bound of projected climate impacts.

    Read more

  • Comments to EPA on Withdrawal of California Preemption Waiver

    The Environmental Protection Agency is reconsidering its withdrawal of a waiver of preemption for California’s zero emission vehicle mandate and greenhouse gas emission standards. We submitted comments supporting the rescission of the waiver withdrawal.

    Read more

  • Comments to EPA on Proposed Phasedown of HFCs

    In the Environmental Protection Agency's phasedown of HFCs under the new HFC legislation, the agency calculates a new set of social cost values for HFCs directly, using the same approach as for the social cost of methane. We submitted comments supporting EPA's methodology and encourage EPA to incorporate the SC-HFC into the IWG process going forward. 

    Read more