Environmental Protection and Habitat Deregulation Measures

Rescind Rules Weakening Air, Water, and Habitat Standards

AKA “Empower Local Control Over Natural Resources”




Which agency/agencies promulgated the regulation? *
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
Which title, parts, and/or sections of the Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) should be rescinded? *
40 CFR Part 50 – National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) Targeted Rescission: Rescind recent changes that weakened pollutant standards (e.g., PM2.5, ozone, nitrogen dioxide) and reduced the stringency of air quality monitoring and enforcement. This would reinstate stricter pollutant thresholds to improve air quality and protect public health, especially for vulnerable communities. 40 CFR Part 122 – EPA’s Effluent Guidelines and Standards (Water Quality Standards) Targeted Rescission: Rescind regulatory rollbacks that loosened restrictions on industrial discharges into waterways, leading to increased pollution levels. The focus would be on restoring stricter guidelines for effluent limitations to protect drinking water sources and aquatic ecosystems. 50 CFR Part 17 – Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants (ESA Regulations) Targeted Rescission: Rescind weakened ESA regulations that reduced protections for endangered species and their habitats. The aim would be to restore more comprehensive habitat conservation measures and strengthen species recovery plans to combat biodiversity loss. 33 CFR Parts 320–330 – Clean Water Act Section 404 (USACE Wetlands Permitting) Targeted Rescission: Rescind rollbacks that weakened wetland protection under Section 404, particularly regarding mitigation requirements and permitting processes. The focus would be on strengthening the permitting process to ensure wetland conservation and mitigate environmental damage. 40 CFR Parts 1500-1508 – National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Regulations Targeted Rescission: Rescind changes that weakened environmental review processes, such as limiting public participation in the NEPA process and reducing the scope of Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs). The goal would be to restore a robust, inclusive NEPA process that thoroughly evaluates environmental impacts before new projects are approved.
What is your name?
—OPTIONAL--
Is your proposed rescission a notice of proposed rulemaking, final rule, direct final rule, interim final rule, or interpretive rule? *
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
What is the name of the regulation being rescinded, if applicable? *
Environmental Protection and Habitat Deregulation Measures
Please provide a short summary of the justifications for the rescission. *
Recent deregulations have weakened critical air, water, and habitat standards, undermining decades of progress in environmental protection and public health. These changes have made it easier for industries to pollute, destroy habitats, and contribute to climate change. Rescinding these rules will restore stronger environmental protections that ensure cleaner air, safer water, and preserved wildlife habitats. By undoing deregulation, we can ensure a healthier future for communities, protect biodiversity, and combat the growing climate crisis.
Please insert the address of the agency. [NPRM, DFR, and IFR only]
Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, D.C. 20460
Please insert the contact information for the agency. *
EPA Office of Public Affairs Phone: 202-564-4700 Email: publicaffairs@epa.gov
What is the background for the regulation being rescinded? *
Over the past several years, a series of regulatory rollbacks have weakened protections for air quality, water safety, and habitat preservation. These actions, many of which were taken under the previous administration, have loosened restrictions on pollutants, weakened the Clean Water Act (Section 404), and undermined protections for endangered species. These changes have led to an increase in toxic emissions, polluted water sources, and habitat destruction. The deregulation of environmental review processes (e.g., NEPA) has also limited public input and environmental oversight, contributing to faster approvals of projects that harm the environment.
Explain the reasons for the rescission. *
Rescinding these rules will restore robust protections for public health and the environment. Stronger air quality standards will reduce the incidence of respiratory diseases and other health issues, particularly in low-income and minority communities. Restoring water quality standards will protect drinking water sources, improve aquatic ecosystems, and prevent waterborne diseases. Reinstating stronger habitat and wildlife protections will help conserve biodiversity, protect endangered species, and maintain ecosystem services. Additionally, returning to thorough environmental reviews will allow the public to participate in the decision-making process and ensure that new projects do not unduly harm the environment.
Describe the text of the relevant C.F.R. provisions as it will exist after the rescission. *
Air Quality: The National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) will be revised to include more stringent limits on pollutants like PM2.5, ozone, and nitrogen dioxide, with more frequent monitoring and stricter compliance requirements. Water Quality: Effluent limitations under the Clean Water Act will be toughened, requiring industries to reduce discharges of harmful chemicals and pollutants into public water sources. The EPA's oversight on water quality standards will be enhanced, and stricter discharge permits will be enforced. Endangered Species Protections: The Endangered Species Act (ESA) regulations will be restored, requiring agencies to engage in more comprehensive habitat protection and species recovery plans. Wetlands Protection: The Clean Water Act Section 404 permitting process will be tightened, ensuring that wetland destruction is minimized and mitigation requirements are enforced more rigorously. Environmental Review Process: The NEPA process will be restored to its full capacity, requiring agencies to conduct thorough environmental impact assessments (EIAs) and allow public participation in the permitting and development of projects that could harm the environment.
Please insert the name of the current agency head. *
Lee Zeldin
Please insert the title of the agency head. *
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency