EPA’s proposal to undo a key scientific finding that supports most climate regulations included an unexpected legal argument.
The draft to scuttle the so-called endangerment finding, released Tuesday, led with the claim that EPA can only regulate pollutants that cause direct harm to people and the environment, and the danger needs to be near the source of pollution.
It added that the link connecting pollution to a danger should be clear-cut. If a local pollutant, for example, combines with the global swirl of atmospheric gases that result in higher temperatures — and contributes to impacts such as floods in Texas, wildfires in California or heat waves in Indiana — that doesn’t count, EPA argued.
“As a general matter, there is a point at which harm no longer has a sufficiently close connection to the relevant conduct to reasonably draw a causal link,” the proposal states. “We propose that emissions from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines in the United States do not have a sufficiently close connection to the adverse impacts identified in the Endangerment Finding to fit within the legal meaning of ‘cause’ or ‘contribute.’”
