EPA’s Biggest Deregulatory Actions Target Power Plants, Vehicles, and Toxic Waste

Key Takeaways

• EPA plans to roll back 31 major environmental rules, targeting regulations on power plants, vehicle emissions, and hazardous waste in a move aimed at reducing industry compliance costs.

• The rollback is framed as pro-economy and pro-energy, but critics argue it threatens public health, weakens climate protections, and contradicts recent record-high EPA enforcement activity.

• Changes won’t take effect immediately as each proposal must undergo public comment, review, and legal scrutiny, with final rules likely not arriving until 2026 or later.

• States like California and New York plan to uphold stricter rules, meaning industries will face a patchwork of regulations and ongoing compliance challenges at the state level.

• Businesses and research labs face mixed outcomes, with some costs reduced but increased legal uncertainty, especially in areas like chemical waste, PFAS rules, and emissions planning.

Since March, I followed with growing concern as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced plans to revise 31 major environmental rules. It was a headline-grabbing moment that signaled a significant policy shift, one with lasting implications for the nation’s approach to climate change and pollution.

New EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, called the proposal “the greatest day of deregulation in U.S. history.”

The announcement was positioned as a victory for American energy independence and economic growth. But for those who closely track environmental policy, it raised serious concerns. Many scientists, advocates, and environmental groups viewed the move not as progress, but as a step backward, a dismantling of key protections at a time when enforcement had finally begun to show results.

So, what’s actually changing? Why now? And what could it mean for industry, cities, and the environment?

What Rules Are Being Rolled Back?

After several years of increasingly strict environmental standards, the EPA’s new leadership is taking a sharp turn. The agency argues that existing climate rules impose heavy financial and operational burdens on businesses, with too little environmental benefit to justify them. Now, the proposed rollbacks focus on three high-impact areas:

1. Power Plants: Rewriting the Rules on Carbon

Rules that pushed utilities toward cleaner energy are being reversed, prolonging fossil fuel use and weakening pollution safeguards. One of the main targets is Clean Power Plan 2.0, which aimed to limit carbon emissions from fossil-fuel plants and accelerate the shift to renewable energy. Under the rollback, carbon-capture requirements and emissions caps will be dropped, and aging coal and gas plants can stay online longer without upgrading pollution controls.

Other key related changes include:

• Relaxing Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS): This pushback may lead to more airborne mercury and arsenic near power plants.

• Weakening wastewater discharge rules: This could allow more heavy metals, like selenium and lead, to reach waterways.

• Loosening coal ash disposal rules: Utilities will have more time to store toxic ash, raising groundwater contamination risks.

These moves may cut compliance costs, but they raise the risk of dirtier air, contaminated water, and prolonged fossil fuel dependency, especially in low-income and rural areas.

2. Vehicle Emissions: The EV Future on Hold

The EPA is easing vehicle emissions rules and scaling back electric vehicle targets, potentially undermining clean transportation efforts. The transportation sector is the nation’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases. Yet proposed changes would reverse emissions standards for all vehicle classes through 2032, delay or eliminate the target for 50% of new car sales to be electric by 2032, and reopen the Endangerment Finding, which is the legal basis for regulating greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. 

These actions signal a federal retreat from EV investment, leaving automakers caught between state mandates and looser federal rules.

3. Toxic Waste: Lower Standards, Higher Stakes

Also included in the pushback proposal are rules on hazardous waste, industrial chemicals, and PFAS being relaxed, raising concerns for public health and lab compliance.

In the name of cost reduction, the EPA proposes to:

• Delay coal ash cleanup timelines, increasing contamination risks

• Weaken the Risk Management Program (RMP), which prevents chemical disasters through audits and emergency planning

• Ease PFAS limits in drinking water, reducing monitoring requirements for manufacturers

These changes could affect research labs, such as the image below, which shows a researcher looking into a chemical tube, and universities that use PFAS-containing materials or generate mixed chemical waste.

Legal and Procedural Hurdles Ahead

Major EPA rule changes must follow a formal process under federal law, including a public notice-and-comment period and detailed cost-benefit analysis. As such, none of the proposals will take effect immediately. 

Here’s how the timeline is expected to unfold:

• July 2025 – Proposals Go Public: The EPA is expected to publish its draft rollback proposals in the Federal Register, launching the official comment periods.

• Fall 2025 – Public Comments Close: Comment periods may run from 60 to 120 days, depending on the complexity of each rule, wrapping up between October and December 2025.

• Early 2026 – Final Rules May Be Issued: If expedited, some rollbacks could be finalized in early 2026. Controversial rules may see delays.

• Spring 2026 – Legal Battles Begin: Environmental groups, states, and some industries are expected to challenge the rules in court. Emergency injunctions could delay or freeze implementation.

• November 2026 – Midterm Elections Could Shift the Landscape: A change in Congressional control—or even in the executive branch—could dramatically alter the trajectory of these regulations.

These steps don’t guarantee implementation. Lawsuits already signaled by advocacy groups and state governments could stall or block key parts of the pushback on the regulations well into 2026 and beyond.

How Businesses and Institutions Are Responding

Across sectors, uncertainty is the new normal. Some are pressing pause on environmental upgrades, while others move forward cautiously, anticipating that court rulings or political shifts could reverse federal policy once again. 

Power producers face pressure to delay pollution control investments, even as local regulations and public scrutiny demand cleaner operations. A coal plant in Gibson, Indiana, has already invested heavily in scrubbers under previous regulations. Now, the company is reassessing future projects, torn between continuing upgrades following Biden-era mandates and pausing further compliance until regulatory clarity emerges.

In the automotive sector, companies are navigating contradictory regulatory signals. For example, a huge automotive manufacturer slowed its ambitious shift toward an all-electric lineup, investing $4 billion in gasoline-powered vehicles while maintaining select EV projects.  

Research labs and universities are also recalibrating. With PFAS regulations, mixed waste rules, and hazardous material reporting all in flux, compliance planning has grown more complex and resource-intensive. Many institutions are now designing adaptive frameworks that align with both federal policy changes and more stringent state requirements.

Across sectors, regulatory ambiguity is driving up demand for legal guidance, environmental audits, and scenario planning. For many organizations, planning for multiple regulatory outcomes has shifted from a contingency to a core strategy.

What This Means on the Ground

While the EPA frames the rollbacks as necessary cost-saving measures, the effects could be deeply felt in communities that already live with the consequences of pollution.

Stakeholder Reactions: Applause and Alarm

The EPA’s deregulatory actions have triggered sharply contrasting responses across sectors.

Industry Applauds the Cost Relief
Trade groups representing energy producers, manufacturers, and automakers have largely welcomed the rollbacks. The American Petroleum Institute (API) praised the EPA’s rollback agenda as aligning with API’s policy roadmap and supporting “affordable, reliable, and secure American energy.”

States Push Back
States like California, New York, and Massachusetts are already preparing legal challenges. California’s Air Resources Board said in a statement that the state “will not compromise on clean air or climate progress,” and pledged to maintain independent emissions standards under Section 177 of the Clean Air Act. A coalition of state attorneys general is also expected to contest any weakening of the Endangerment Finding, arguing that it undermines the EPA’s legal authority to regulate greenhouse gases.

Environmental and Public Health Groups Warn of Long-Term Harm
Organizations like the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) have criticized the rollbacks as short-sighted. They warn that delaying cleanup of toxic sites or weakening emissions caps will disproportionately affect marginalized and low-income communities already overburdened by pollution. Public health advocates are also alarmed by the PFAS rollback, noting that exposure to even low levels of these “forever chemicals” has been linked to cancer, reproductive harm, and immune system disruption.

Scientists and Academics Voice Concern
Environmental scientists from major research institutions are sounding the alarm, not just about the potential environmental impacts, but also the chilling effect on data collection and transparency. If monitoring requirements are scaled back, it may become harder to measure pollution or hold violators accountable. 

Redefining Responsibility

More than a policy change, the EPA’s 31-rule deregulation marks a transition in the balance of environmental responsibility. As federal oversight weakens, states, cities, and private institutions are being left to fill in the gap, often with fewer resources and more risk.

What happens next won’t be decided by the EPA alone. It will depend on how states assert their authority, how industries navigate conflicting standards, and how the public engages with the process. The outcome won’t just influence future regulations but will also shape how pollution is managed, how risks are addressed, and who holds responsibility in the decades ahead.

FAQs

What is the EPA rollback?

The EPA plans to revise or repeal 31 major environmental rules affecting power plants, vehicle emissions, and toxic waste regulations, aiming to reduce industry compliance burdens.

Why is the EPA reversing regulations now?

The rollback reflects the Trump administration’s shift toward deregulation, citing high energy costs and economic pressures as reasons to ease climate and pollution controls.

Are these rule changes already in effect?

No. Each rollback must undergo a formal rulemaking process, including public comments and legal review. Most rules won’t be finalized before early to mid-2026.

Can states still enforce stricter environmental rules?

Yes. States like California, New York, and Illinois plan to maintain or strengthen their environmental standards, potentially creating a patchwork of state and federal rules.

What does this mean for businesses and labs?

Some industries may benefit from reduced federal requirements, but compliance remains complex due to state laws and the ongoing need for safety, waste, and emissions tracking.

TRADESAFE provides premium industrial safety equipment, such as Lockout Tagout Devices, Eyewash Stations, Absorbents, and more; precision-engineered and trusted by professionals to offer unmatched performance in ensuring workplace safety.