Environmental Protection Agency

Notes: On March 12, 2025, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced plans to overhaul dozens of agency actions relating to climate change regulation. The announcement names a large set of rules and activities that the agency will be reconsidering and revising. The database below is being updated as those plans are formalized into official deregulatory action.  

On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued a memorandum instituting a regulatory freeze, preventing agencies from issuing proposals or rules pending review by Trump-appointed agency heads. On January 31, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order 14192, directing agencies to identify 10 existing regulations to eliminate for each new regulation they promulgate.

Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings under the Clean Air Act

GHG Emissions from Motor Vehicles

GHG Emissions from Electric Generating Units (EGUs)

GHG Emissions from Aircrafts

Greenhouse Gas Mitigation under the Clean Air Act

GHG Emission Standards for Mobile Sources

GHG Emission Standards for Stationary Sources

GHG Emission Standards for Aircrafts

PSD and Title V Permitting for Stationary GHG Sources

GHG Mitigation under the Inflation Reduction Act

Hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) and Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs)

HCFC and HFC Phase-Out under Clean Air Act and Montreal Protocol

HCFC and HFC Phase-Out under the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act and Montreal Protocol

HCFC and HFC Emissions Control under the Clean Air Act

Significant New Alternatives Policy Program

Ozone-Depleting Refrigerant Management

Renewable Fuels

Renewable Fuel Standards (RFS)

Other Actions under RFS Program

Carbon Capture and Sequestration

Underground Injection Control Program for Geologic Sequestration of CO2

Conditional Exclusion from RCRA Hazardous Waste Classification for Geologic Sequestration of CO2

Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule

Section 114(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act authorizes the EPA Administrator to require “any person who owns or operates any emissions source,” any person who the Administrator believes may have “necessary information,” and any person who is subject to the CAA to monitor and report on emissions and provide other information (42 U.S.C. § 7414(a)(1)). Additionally, under section 208 of the Clean Air Act, the EPA Administrator is authorized to require the manufacturers of new motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines to make reports and provide information (42 U.S.C. § 7542). Relying on these sections, EPA has established the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP), under which certain facilities emitting greenhouse gases must report annually on their emissions.

On May 14, 2024, EPA issued a final rule revising methane emissions reporting requirements for petroleum and natural gas systems under the GHGRP. 89 Fed. Reg. 42,062 (May 14, 2024). The revisions were mandated by the Inflation Reduction Reduction Act, which amended the Clean Air Act to insert a new section 136. Under the new section 136(h), EPA was required to update the GGRP regulations pursuant to which petroleum and natural gas facilities report their greenhouse gas emissions “to ensure the reporting . . . [is] based on empirical data” that “accurately reflect[s] the total methane emissions and waste emissions from the applicable facilities.” (See in Independent Petroleum Association of America, et al v. EPA “Litigation” below.)

Litigation

Challenge to May 2024 Rule - Independent Petroleum Association of America, et al v. EPA 

On July 12, 2024, the Independent Petroleum Association and several other parties filed a petition for review of EPA’s final rule in the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The consolidated case, has not yet been briefed and was held in abeyance in September 2024.

Biden Administration (2021-2024)

On May 14, 2024, EPA issued a final rule revising methane emissions reporting requirements for petroleum and natural gas systems under the GHGRP. 89 Fed. Reg. 42,062 (May 14, 2024). The revisions were mandated by the Inflation Reduction Reduction Act, which amended the Clean Air Act to insert a new section 136. Under the new section 136(h), EPA was required to update the GGRP regulations pursuant to which petroleum and natural gas facilities report their greenhouse gas emissions “to ensure the reporting . . . [is] based on empirical data” that “accurately reflect[s] the total methane emissions and waste emissions from the applicable facilities.” (See in Independent Petroleum Association of America, et al v. EPA “Litigation” below.)

On April 25, 2024, EPA issued a final rule making various changes to its GHGRP regulations. 89 Fed. Reg. 31,802 (Apr. 25, 2024). Among other changes, the final rule updates the global warming potentials and emissions factors that are used in calculating emissions, and modifies emissions calculation methodologies. The final rule also establishes new greenhouse gas monitoring and reporting requirements for five source categories: (1) coke calcining, (2) ceramics manufacturing, (3) calcium carbide production, (4) caprolactam, glyoxal and glyoxylic acid production, and (5) facilities conducting geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide with enhanced oil recovery. (See National Waste & Recycling Association v. EPA in “Litigation” below.)

First Trump Administration (2017-2020)

N/A

Obama Administration (2009-2016)

On December 9, 2016, EPA issued a final rule making various amendments to the GHGRP regulations “to streamline and improve implementation of the [regulations], to improve the quality and consistency of data collected under the [GHGRP], and to provide clarity” to reporting entities. 81 Fed. Reg. 89,188 (Dec. 9, 2016). Among other things, the changes removed reporting requirements for certain facilities that report little to no emissions and removed reported data elements that EPA no longer requires.

On November 30, 2016, EPA issued a final rule revising the provisions of its GHGRP regulations under which petroleum and natural gas facilities report on their emissions. 81 Fed. Reg. 86,490 (Nov. 30, 2016). Among other things, the final rule adds new monitoring methods for detecting leaks from oil and gas equipment, and new emissions factors that can be used in conjunction with the monitoring methods to calculate greenhouse gas emissions from equipment leaks. 

On December 1, 2010, EPA issued a final rule requiring additional sources of fluorinated greenhouse gases, including electronics manufacturing and importers and exporters of pre-charged equipment and closed-cell foams, to monitor and report their emissions under the GHGRP. 75 Fed. Reg. 74,774 (Dec. 1, 2010). In a separate rule issued on the same day, EPA also required reporting for geologic sequestration and other underground injection of carbon dioxide. 75 Fed. Reg. 75,060 (Dec. 1, 2010).

On November 30, 2010, EPA issued a final rule requiring petroleum and natural gas facilities to monitor and report on their emissions under the GHGRP. 75 Fed. Reg. 74,458 (Nov. 30, 2010).

On July 12, 2010, EPA issued a final rule requiring facilities in the following source categories to monitor and report on their emissions under the GHGRP: magnesium production, underground coal mines, industrial wastewater treatment, and industrial waste landfills. 75 Fed. Reg. 39,736 (July 12, 2010).

On October 30, 2009, EPA issued a final rule promulgating regulations for the GHGRP. The regulations require facilities with greenhouse gas emissions above certain thresholds to monitor and report on their emissions. The requirements apply to fossil fuel suppliers and industrial gas suppliers, direct greenhouse gas emitters and manufacturers of heavy-duty and off-road vehicles and engines.

Litigation

Challenge to May 2024 Rule - Independent Petroleum Association of America, et al v. EPA 

On July 12, 2024, the Independent Petroleum Association and several other parties filed a petition for review of EPA’s final rule in the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The consolidated case, has not yet been briefed and was held in abeyance in September 2024.

Challenge to April 2024 Rule - National Waste & Recycling Association v. EPA

On June 24, 2024, the National Waste & Recycling Association filed a petition for review of EPA’s final rule in the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The case has not yet been briefed and oral argument has not been scheduled.

Non-Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards with Greenhouse Gas Co-Benefits

Ambient Standards (NAAQS)

Emissions Standards (NESHAP and NSPS)

Cross-State Air Pollution Rule

Coal Ash

EPA regulates the disposal of coal combustion residuals, or coal ash, under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Section 1008(a) of the Act authorizes EPA to set guidelines for solid waste management. Section 4005 prohibits disposal of solid waste in non-compliance with EPA’s guidelines, which is enforceable by citizen suit.

On May 8, 2024, EPA published a final rule on coal ash disposal. 89 Fed. Reg. 38,950 (May 8, 2024). The rule is partially in response to a D.C. Circuit Court of Appeal’s order remanding certain regulatory issues to EPA. (See Utility Solid Waste Activities Group v. EPA in “Litigation” below.) It also revises certain disposal requirements. (See City Utilities of Springfield, Missouri v. EPA in “Litigation” below.)

Litigation

Challenge to 2024 Rule - City Utilities of Springfield, Missouri v. EPA

On June 13, 2024, states and utility groups filed a petition for review of the 2024 rule in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. As of January 18, 2025, the case has not yet been briefed and oral argument is not set.

Biden Administration (2021-2024)

On May 8, 2024, EPA published a final rule on coal ash disposal. 89 Fed. Reg. 38,950 (May 8, 2024). The rule is partially in response to a D.C. Circuit Court of Appeal’s order remanding certain regulatory issues to EPA. (See Utility Solid Waste Activities Group v. EPA in “Litigation” below.) It also revises certain disposal requirements. (See City Utilities of Springfield, Missouri v. EPA in “Litigation” below.)

First Trump Administration (2017-2020)

On November 12, 2020, EPA published a final rule allowing coal ash pond operators to escape the lining requirement by showing that they are using an alternative method to prevent leaks. 85 Fed. Reg. 72,506 (Nov. 12, 2020). This action finalized a portion of the proposed rule. 85 Fed. Reg. 12,456 (Mar. 3, 2020). EPA indicated that it would address other portions of the proposal in a separate action.

On August 28, 2020, EPA published a rule to finalize two proposals. 85 Fed. Reg. 53,516 (Aug. 28, 2020). The first, published on December 2, 2019, proposed regulations to implement a Court of Appeals’ decision vacating portions of the 2015 rule. 84 Fed. Reg. 65,941 (Dec. 2, 2019). (See also Utility Solid Waste Activities Group v. EPA in “Litigation” below.) The second, published on August 14, 2019, proposed amendments to annual groundwater monitoring requirements and requirements for the publicly accessible CCR internet sites. 84 Fed. Reg. 40,353 (Aug. 14, 2019). (See Labadie Environmental Organization v. EPA in “Litigation” below.)

On July 30, 2018, EPA published a final rule revising the 2015 coal ash regulations. 83 Fed. Reg. 36,435 (July 30, 2018). There are three main changes: First, EPA adopted two alternative performance standards for states with certain permit programs. Second, EPA revised the groundwater protection standards for constituents without an established drinking water standard. Third, EPA extended the compliance deadline for certain facilities. (See also Utility Solid Waste Activities Group v. EPA in “Litigation” below.)

Obama Administration (2009-2016)

On April 17, 2015, EPA finalized national regulations on the disposal of coal ash under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. 80 Fed. Reg. 21,302 (Apr. 17, 2015). Coal ash, a toxic residue left after burning coal, is disposed of in “coal ash ponds” that can leak without proper lining. The rule requires any existing unlined coal ash ponds that were causing groundwater contamination above certain levels to stop receiving ash. For the purpose of the rule, EPA considered ponds with a compacted soil liner to be “lined” and therefore able to continue receiving ash.

Litigation

Challenge to 2024 Rule - City Utilities of Springfield, Missouri v. EPA

On June 13, 2024, states and utility groups filed a petition for review of the 2024 rule in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. As of January 18, 2025, the case has not yet been briefed and oral argument is not set.

Challenge to August 2020 Rule - Labadie Environmental Organization v. EPA

On November 24, 2020, environmental groups challenged the final rule in the D.C. Circuit. On November 25, 2024, the petitioners filed an unopposed motion to hold the case in abeyance.

Challenge to 2015 Rule - Utility Solid Waste Activities Group v. EPA

On July 15, 2015, the Utility Solid Waste Activities Group filed a petition for review of the 2015 rule in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. On August 21, 2018, the court vacated the portion of the 2015 rule that permitted unlined coal ash ponds to continue to operate until they caused groundwater contamination, and vacated the portion of the rule that defined ponds with clay linings as “lined.” Prior to the decision, EPA had promulgated a final rule, in July 2018, extending the deadline for leaking unlined coal ash ponds to stop receiving waste until October 31, 2020. Following another legal challenge, the D.C. Circuit remanded the rule to the EPA for further consideration in light of the USWAG decision.

Climate Policy under the Clean Water Act

The Clean Water Act grants federal jurisdiction over "waters of the United States."

On January 18, 2023, EPA published a final rule to revise the definition of “waters of the United States.” 88 Fed. Reg. 3,004 (Jan. 18, 2023), The rule broadened the definition promulgated in the vacated 2020 rule to include traditional navigable waters, interstate waters, and the territorial seas, plus their tributaries and adjacent wetlands. However, shortly after the rule was finalized, the Supreme Court handed down an opinion in Sackett v. EPA that addressed the statutory definition of “waters of the United States.” The Court found the definition to exclude wetlands that do not connect at their surface to a federally regulated body of water, which is inconsistent with EPA’s use of a significant nexus standard. On September 8, 2023, EPA amended the final rule to conform with the Sackett ruling. 88 Fed. Reg. 61,964 (Sept. 8, 2023). (See West Virginia v. EPA and Kentucky v. EPA in “Litigation” below.)

Litigation

Challenge to 2023 Rule - West Virginia v. EPA and Kentucky v. EPA

The final rule published in January 2023 was challenged in multiple courts. In West Virginia v. EPA, No. 23-cv-32 (D.N.D. filed 2023) the court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, and the appeal was dismissed in West Virginia v. EPA, No. 23-2411 (8th Cir. filed 2023). In Kentucky v. EPA, No. 23-5345 (6th Cir. filed 2023), the litigation was stayed while the Supreme Court decided Sackett v. EPA. Since the Sackett decision came down, litigation has been ongoing. Most recently, EPA filed its appellee brief in February 2024.

Biden Administration (2021-2024)

On January 18, 2023, EPA published a final rule to revise the definition of “waters of the United States.” 88 Fed. Reg. 3,004 (Jan. 18, 2023), The rule broadened the definition promulgated in the vacated 2020 rule to include traditional navigable waters, interstate waters, and the territorial seas, plus their tributaries and adjacent wetlands. However, shortly after the rule was finalized, the Supreme Court handed down an opinion in Sackett v. EPA that addressed the statutory definition of “waters of the United States.” The Court found the definition to exclude wetlands that do not connect at their surface to a federally regulated body of water, which is inconsistent with EPA’s use of a significant nexus standard. On September 8, 2023, EPA amended the final rule to conform with the Sackett ruling. 88 Fed. Reg. 61,964 (Sept. 8, 2023). (See West Virginia v. EPA and Kentucky v. EPA in “Litigation” below.)

First Trump Administration (2017-2020)

On April 21, 2020, EPA published a final rule with a new definition of “waters of the United States.” 85 Fed. Reg. 22,250 (Apr. 21, 2020). The final rule defined “waters of the United States” to include “territorial seas and traditional navigable waters; perennial and intermittent tributaries that contribute surface water flow to such waters; certain lakes, ponds, and impoundments of jurisdictional waters; and wetlands adjacent to other jurisdictional waters.” The rule included four categories of jurisdictional waters and identified waters and features that are excluded from the definition. (See Pascua Yaqui Tribe v. EPA in “Litigation” below.)

On February 28, 2017, President Trump issued an executive order directing EPA to reconsider the 2015 rule defining “waters of the united states.” On March 6, 2017, EPA published a notice of intent to review and rescind or revise the 2015 rule. 82 Fed. Reg. 12,532 (Mar. 6, 2017). On July 27, 2017, EPA published a proposed rule to repeal the 2015 rule and reinstate the rules that existed prior to its promulgation. 82 Fed. Reg. 34,899 (July 27, 2017). EPA finalized that rule on October 22, 2019. 84 Fed. Reg. 56,626 (Oct. 22, 2019).

Obama Administration (2009-2016)

In 2015, EPA published a final rule defining “waters of the United States.” 80 Fed. Reg. 37,054 (June 29, 2015).

Litigation

Challenge to 2023 Rule - West Virginia v. EPA and Kentucky v. EPA

The final rule published in January 2023 was challenged in multiple courts. In West Virginia v. EPA, No. 23-cv-32 (D.N.D. filed 2023) the court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, and the appeal was dismissed in West Virginia v. EPA, No. 23-2411 (8th Cir. filed 2023). In Kentucky v. EPA, No. 23-5345 (6th Cir. filed 2023), the litigation was stayed while the Supreme Court decided Sackett v. EPA. Since the Sackett decision came down, litigation has been ongoing. Most recently, EPA filed its appellee brief in February 2024.

Challenge to 2020 Rule - Pascua Yaqui Tribe v. EPA

Several parties challenged the final rule with new definitions of “waters of the United States” in various district court, raising statutory and arbitrary & capricious arguments. These cases—including, among others, Conservation Law Foundation v. EPA, No. 20-cv-10820 (D. Mass. filed 2020), Puget Soundkeeper Alliance v. EPA, No. 20-cv-950 (W.D. Wash. Filed 2020), California v. Wheeler, No. 20-cv-3005 (N.D. Cal. filed 2020), and Pascua Yaqui Tribe v. EPA, No. 21-cv-16791 (D. Ariz. filed 2020)—were dismissed, stayed, or voluntarily remanded before resolution. As a result of EPA’s voluntary motion to remand in Pascua Yaqui Tribe, the rule was vacated in 2021.

Climate Resilience in Chemical Facility Risk Management

Clean Air Act Regulations

Clean Water Act Regulations

Secret Science Rule

The Federal Housekeeping Statute authorizes the “head of an Executive department or military department [to] prescribe regulations for the government of his department, the conduct of its employees, the distribution and performance of its business, and the custody, use, and preservation of its records, papers, and property.” EPA asserted authority under that section to regulate its use of scientific information, including how it “will handle [scientific] studies when data and models underlying [them] are or are not publicly available in a manner sufficient for independent validation and analysis.”

On January 6, 2021, EPA finalized a rule to limit the use of scientific studies for which underlying data is not publicly available. 86 Fed. Reg. 469 (Jan. 6, 2021). The final rule applies to scientific data that the agency uses in crafting regulations as well as all "influential scientific information" at the agency, a broad term that could apply to informal guidance or other agency actions. (See New York v. EPA in “Litigation” below.)

Litigation

Challenge to 2021 Rule - New York v. EPA

On January 19, 2021, a coalition of states challenged the rule in the District Court for the Southern District of New York. A parallel challenge was filed in the District Court for the District of Montana, which on February 1, 2024 vacated the rule at the request of the EPA under the Biden administration.

Biden Administration (2021-2024)

On January 6, 2021, EPA finalized a rule to limit the use of scientific studies for which underlying data is not publicly available. 86 Fed. Reg. 469 (Jan. 6, 2021). The final rule applies to scientific data that the agency uses in crafting regulations as well as all "influential scientific information" at the agency, a broad term that could apply to informal guidance or other agency actions. (See New York v. EPA in “Litigation” below.)

First Trump Administration (2017–2020)

On March 18, 2020, EPA issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking in which it outlined clarifications, modifications, and additions to certain provisions in its 2018 proposed rule on “Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science.” 85 Fed. Reg. 15,396 (Mar. 18, 2020). Among other things, EPA proposed to significantly expand the scope of the proposed rule, such that it would apply not only to the science relied upon by EPA in promulgating significant regulatory decisions, but also in finalizing influential scientific information and would apply to all data and models underlying such science. 

On April 30, 2018, EPA published a proposed rule titled “Strengthening Transparency in REgulatory Science.” 83 Fed. Reg. 18,768 (Apr. 30, 2018). If finalized, the rule would require EPA, when promulgating significant regulatory decisions, to only rely on scientific information for which the underlying data had been made publicly available. This could have significantly restricted the scientific research EPA was able to consider, especially in the public health field, as the data underlying public health studies is often confidential participant information that cannot be made available to the general public. 

Litigation

Challenge to 2021 Rule - New York v. EPA

On January 19, 2021, a coalition of states challenged the rule in the District Court for the Southern District of New York. A parallel challenge was filed in the District Court for the District of Montana, which on February 1, 2024 vacated the rule at the request of the EPA under the Biden administration.

Overhaul of Cost-Benefit Analysis

On January 20, 2021, President Biden signed Executive Order 13990 (Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis). Section 2 of the Executive Order directed the EPA administrator to “consider publishing for notice and comment a proposed rule suspending, revising, or rescinding” the final rule issued on December 23, 2020 titled “Increasing Consistency and Transparency in Considering Benefits and Costs in the Clean Air Act Rulemaking Process” (commonly known as the “Benefit-Cost Rule”). The Benefit-Cost Rule was issued by EPA during the first Trump administration. In promulgating the Benefit Cost Rule, EPA relies on section 301(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act, which authorizes the Administrator “to prescribe such regulations as are necessary to carry out his functions under this chapter.” The preamble to the Benefit-Cost Rule indicated that the “authority in Section 301(a)(1) extends to internal agency procedures that increase the Agency's ability to provide consistency and transparency to the public in regard to the rulemaking process under the” Clean Air Act and thus adoption of the Benefit-Cost Rule was authorized under that section. Later, when EPA rescinded the Benefit-Cost Rule, it suggested that it may not have been authorized under section 301(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act.

On July 13, 2023, EPA issued a final rule rescinding the 2020 Benefit-Cost Rule. EPA concluded that the changes mandated by the 2020 Benefit-Cost Rule “were inadvisable, untethered to the Clean Air Act (CAA), and not necessary to effectuate the purposes of the Act.” 88 Fed. Reg. 44,710 (July 13, 2023).

Biden Administration (2021-2024)

On July 13, 2023, EPA issued a final rule rescinding the 2020 Benefit-Cost Rule. EPA concluded that the changes mandated by the 2020 Benefit-Cost Rule “were inadvisable, untethered to the Clean Air Act (CAA), and not necessary to effectuate the purposes of the Act.” 88 Fed. Reg. 44,710 (July 13, 2023).

On May 14, 2021, EPA published an interim final rule rescinding the 2020 Benefit-Cost Rule and requested public comment on that action. 86 Fed. Reg. 26,406 (May 14, 2021).

First Trump Administration (2017–2020)

On December 9, 2020, EPA finalized the so-called Benefit-Cost Rule, which established new requirements for  analyzing new regulations' costs and benefits under the Clean Air Act. 85 Fed. Reg. 84,130 (Dec. 23, 2020). The changes sought to limit EPA’s  consideration of co-benefits when developing and justifying new regulations and could thus constrain its  ability to consider climate regulations' ancillary benefits, such as reductions in conventional pollutants. (See New York v. EPA in “Litigation” below.)

Litigation

Challenge to Benefit-Cost Rule - New York v. EPA

On January 19, 2021, a coalition of states challenged the Benefit-Cost Rule in the D.C. Circuit. The case was then held in abeyance in February 2021.

Climate Plans and Strategies

On January 27, 2021, President Biden signed Executive Order 14008 (Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad). Among other directives, Section 211 of the Executive Order directed the head of each agency to develop an action plan that describes steps the agency can take with regard to its facilities and operations to bolster adaptation and increase resilience to the impacts of climate change. Each agency must report annually on its progress in implementing the plan.

On June 20, 2024, EPA released the 2024–2027 Climate Adaptation Plan, which describes how the agency will fulfill its mission and statutory obligations in a changing climate. The plan describes a number of priority actions, including: fostering a climate-ready workforce; building facility resilience; developing climate-resilient supply chains; integrating climate resilience into external funding opportunities; applying climate data and tools to decision-making; and integrating climate adaptation into rulemaking processes.

Biden Administration (2021-2024)

On June 20, 2024, EPA released the 2024–2027 Climate Adaptation Plan, which describes how the agency will fulfill its mission and statutory obligations in a changing climate. The plan describes a number of priority actions, including: fostering a climate-ready workforce; building facility resilience; developing climate-resilient supply chains; integrating climate resilience into external funding opportunities; applying climate data and tools to decision-making; and integrating climate adaptation into rulemaking processes.

On October 7, 2021, EPA and twenty-two other federal agencies released plans detailing how they will adapt to climate change and increase resilience to climate change impacts. The climate adaptation and resilience plans were previously submitted to and reviewed by the National Climate Task Force, White House Council on Environmental Quality’s Federal Chief Sustainability Officer, and the Office of Management and Budget.

On October 1, 2021, EPA released its FY 2022-2026 Strategic Plan Draft. The first-listed goal in the Draft Plan is to “[t]ackle the climate crisis,” which the Draft Plan breaks down into three separate objectives:

  • Objective 1.1: Reduce Emissions that Cause Climate Change
  • Objective 1.2: Accelerate Resilience and Adaptation to Climate Change Impacts
  • Objective 1.3: Advance International and Subnational Climate Efforts

The Draft Plan includes information on strategies and long-term performance goals pertinent to each objective. It also emphasizes that “[p]olicies to tackle climate change must address the disproportionate vulnerability of low-income communities and communities of color while also dealing with the legacy pollution those communities continue to endure.” 

Obama Administration (2009–2016)

During the Obama Administration, EPA released three climate adaptation plans:

Back to the Climate Regulation Database homepage