News
EPA announces dozens of environmental regulations it plans to target
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin testified before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on his nomination in January.
Ting Shen/AFP/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Ting Shen/AFP/Getty Images
The Environmental Protection Agency announced plans to target more than two dozen rules and policies in what the agency called the “most consequential day of deregulation in U.S. history.”
The EPA didn’t provide details about what it wants to do with the regulations — whether it will try to weaken them or eliminate them entirely. In most cases, the agency said it is reconsidering rules that apply to things like climate pollution from vehicles and power plants, wastewater from coal plants and air pollution from the energy and manufacturing sectors.
The list the agency put out is a “roadmap” of the regulations it will try to roll back in the coming year, says Jason Rylander, legal director of the Climate Law Institute at the Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental group.
“This EPA is planning to take a wrecking ball to environmental law as we know it,” he says. “The intent appears to be to neuter EPA’s ability to address climate change and to limit air pollution that affects public health.”
The EPA said in an email to NPR that it doesn’t have additional information to share about its plans for changing or repealing environmental regulations.
“We are driving a dagger straight into the heart of the climate change religion to drive down cost of living for American families, unleash American energy, bring auto jobs back to the U.S. and more,” EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said in a news release.
Rylander says the agency didn’t have to release a list of rules it plans to challenge. “But they’ve made clear that they intend to start that process,” he says.
Overhauling federal environmental regulations requires a so-called rulemaking process that usually takes a couple of years, Rylander says.
“But we’ve seen that this administration wants to move with a speed that we have not often seen,” he adds. “I suspect that you’ll start seeing proposed rules coming out on each of these in the coming weeks.”
Any effort by the EPA to rollback environmental rules will almost certainly face legal challenges.
“EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin today announced plans for the greatest increase in pollution in decades,” Amanda Leland, executive director of the Environmental Defense Fund, said in a statement. “The result will be more toxic chemicals, more cancers, more asthma attacks, and more dangers for pregnant women and their children. Rather than helping our economy, it will create chaos.”
Leland said her group “will vigorously oppose Administrator Zeldin’s unlawful attack on the public health of the American people that seeks to tear down life-saving clean air standards – putting millions of people in harm’s way.”
EPA says it’s reconsidering rules for power plant emissions
The EPA says it will reconsider rules finalized under the Biden administration that limit climate pollution from power plants.
Power plants are the second biggest source of planet-heating greenhouse gasses behind transportation, according to the EPA. Under the regulations, existing coal and new natural gas-fired power plants that run more than 40% of the time would have to eliminate 90% of their carbon dioxide emissions, the main driver of global warming.
The rules followed a 2022 Supreme Court ruling that limited the EPA’s options for regulating power plant emissions. Justices said that without a specific law, the agency cannot force the entire power generation industry to move away from fossil fuels toward less-polluting energy sources. So, instead, the EPA under the Biden administration created regulations governing individual power plants.
When the new rules were finalized last year, Manish Bapna, chief executive of the Natural Resources Defense Council, predicted they would “drive up investment, innovation, and good jobs in the clean energy economy of the future” and give industry the certainty it “needs to meet growing demand in the cleanest, cheapest, most reliable way possible.”
However, some in the utility industry warned the restrictions would threaten electric reliability.
“The path outlined by the EPA today is unlawful, unrealistic and unachievable,” Jim Matheson, chief executive of the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association in a statement at the time.
Zeldin said in a news release on Wednesday that the EPA is “seeking to ensure that the agency follows the rule of law while providing all Americans with access to reliable and affordable energy.”
Pollution from cars and trucks is also on EPA’s list
President Trump has made it a priority to roll back the Biden administration’s multi-pronged push supporting the transition to electric vehicles. Changing EPA standards limiting air pollution from vehicle tailpipes is a crucial part of that agenda.
Former president Barack Obama toughened fuel economy and EPA vehicle emission standards. During Trump’s first term, automakers had lobbied for looser rules, but were caught off guard by how dramatically Trump rolled them back. The next few years were chaotic; some automakers struck a voluntary deal with California to keep meeting their stricter rules, even if it wasn’t legally necessary.
Under the Biden administration, the standards grew stricter over time with rules designed to accelerate a transition to EVs. The current EPA standards do not mandate a certain number of EVs, but they set emissions rules so strict that automakers would essentially have to manufacture a large portion of vehicles without emissions — as much as two thirds of the vehicles sold by 2032 — in order to meet the rules.
With EV sales growth slowing, some automakers have wondered if that is still feasible and called for the rules to be adjusted. But the industry is also frustrated with the whipsawing of regulations back and forth, which makes it difficult to plan future products. In a statement Wednesday, the trade group representing automakers called for a “balanced approach.”
Environmental and public health groups support the more aggressive standards, which reduce pollution that causes asthma and heart disease as well as fighting climate change. So do consumer advocacy groups: the EPA had also estimated the new rules could save drivers up to a trillion dollars in gasoline over the life of the rules. But many critics, including the oil industry, have said the rules undermine consumer choice by favoring EVs.
EPA says it’s rethinking whether climate pollution endangers public health
Underlying a lot of the EPA’s actions on climate change is a 2009 determination that greenhouse gasses like carbon dioxide and methane threaten public health. The EPA now says it will reconsider that so-called endangerment finding, as well as actions the agency took that were based on the determination.
Daren Bakst, director of the Center for Energy and Environment at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, said in an email to NPR that the EPA has used the endangerment finding to try to “control large portions of the economy.”
If the EPA determines that the endangerment finding is no longer applicable, Bakst says it “would preclude future greenhouse gas regulations.” It could also pave the way to repeal some existing rules, he says.
However, environmental groups say it won’t be easy for the EPA to scrap its determination that greenhouse gas emissions contribute to climate change. The science showing the warming impact of those emissions has only gotten stronger since the Supreme Court authorized the agency in 2007 to regulate greenhouse gas emissions if it finds that they contribute to climate change.
“The state of climate science has evolved significantly since the endangerment finding first came out,” says Rylander, legal director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “I can’t imagine anyone being able to conclude, on the basis of current science, that greenhouse gas pollution does not affect climate and public health. So I’m somewhat baffled that they think they’re going to be able to eliminate it and have that stand up in court.”
Rachel Cleetus, policy director with the Climate and Energy Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, agrees.
“We’re seeing climate related disasters mount catastrophically,” Cleetus says. “We’ve seen loss of life from wildfires and extremely intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts. We’re seeing so much economic damage from these kinds of extreme climate related disasters.”
The utility industry has also raised concerns about getting rid of the endangerment finding. In a filing to the U.S. Supreme Court, the Edison Electric Institute (EEI), a group that represents electric utilities, said allowing the EPA to regulate climate pollution creates an orderly system for cutting emissions while minimizing economic impacts on consumers and businesses. Rolling back the agency’s authority could expose companies to a flurry of environmental lawsuits, the group said. “This would be chaos.”
The EPA has repeatedly reaffirmed the endangerment finding, and in 2022, Congress included language in the Inflation Reduction Act that labels greenhouse gases as pollutants under the Clean Air Act.
Conrad Schneider, senior director for the U.S. at the Clean Air Task Force, said in a statement: “This signal to deregulate air pollution is diametrically opposed to the obligation the EPA has to protect public health.”
News
Not a Deal-Breaker: White House Downplays Iranian Action Near the Strait
Just two weeks ago, President Trump threatened to wipe out Iran’s civilization if it did not open the Strait of Hormuz. Days later, he said any Iranian “who fires at us, or at peaceful vessels, will be BLOWN TO HELL!”
Yet on Wednesday, after Iran seized two ships near the Strait of Hormuz, the White House was quick to argue the action was not a deal breaker for potential peace negotiations.
“These were not U.S. ships,” Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, said on Fox News. “These were not Israeli ships.” Therefore, she explained, the Iranians had not violated a cease-fire with the United States that Mr. Trump has extended indefinitely.
She cautioned the news media against “blowing this out of proportion.”
The surprisingly tolerant tone from the White House suggests Mr. Trump is not eager to reignite a war that he started alongside Israel on Feb. 28 — a war that has proved unpopular with Americans and has gone on longer than he initially estimated.
The president on Tuesday extended a cease-fire between the United States and Iran that had been set to expire within hours, saying he wanted to give Tehran a chance to come up with a new proposal to end the war.
The American military has displayed its overwhelming might during the war, successfully striking thousands of targets. But it remains unclear whether Mr. Trump will accomplish the political objectives of the war.
The Iranian regime, even after its top leaders were killed, is still intact. Iran has not agreed to Mr. Trump’s demands to turn over its nuclear capabilities to the United States or significantly curtail them. And the Strait of Hormuz, a key passageway for world commerce that was open before the war, remains closed.
Nevertheless, the White House has repeatedly highlighted the military successes on the battlefield as evidence it is winning the war.
“We have completely confused and obliterated their regime,” Ms. Leavitt said on Fox Wednesday. “They are in a very weak position thanks to the actions taken by President Trump and our great United States armed forces, and so we will continue this important mission on our own.”
The oscillation between threats and a more conciliatory tone has long been one of Mr. Trump’s signature negotiating strategies.
Potential peace talks between the two countries are on hold. Vice President JD Vance had been poised to fly to Islamabad for negotiations. But the trip was postponed until Iran can “come up with a unified proposal,” Mr. Trump said.
The United States recently transmitted a written proposal to the Iranians intended to establish base-line points of agreement that could frame more detailed negotiations. The document covers a broad range of issues, but the core sticking points are the same ones that have bedeviled Western negotiators for more than a decade: the scope of Iran’s uranium enrichment program and the fate of its stockpile of enriched uranium.
Mr. Trump has not spoken publicly about the cease-fire, other than on social media. On Wednesday, he also posted about topics including “my Apprentice Juggernaut” — a reference to his former television show; the Virginia elections, which he called “rigged”; and a new book about Supreme Court Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr.
News
Pentagon says Navy secretary is leaving, the latest departure of a top defense leader
Secretary of the Navy John Phelan speaks, as President Trump listens, at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club on Dec. 22 in Palm Beach, Fla.
Alex Brandon/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Alex Brandon/AP
WASHINGTON — Navy Secretary John Phelan is leaving his job, the Pentagon abruptly announced Wednesday, the first head of a military service to depart during President Trump’s second term but just the latest top defense leader to step down or be ousted.
No reason was given for the unexpected departure of the Navy’s top civilian official, coming as the sea service has imposed a blockade of Iranian ports and is targeting ships linked to Tehran around the world during a tenuous ceasefire in the war. Another Trump loyalist is taking over as acting head of the Navy: Undersecretary Hung Cao, a 25-year Navy combat veteran who ran unsuccessful campaigns for the U.S. Senate and House in Virginia.


Phelan’s departure is the latest in a series of shakeups of top leadership at the Pentagon, coming just weeks after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth fired the Army’s top uniformed officer, Gen. Randy George. Hegseth also has fired several other top generals, admirals and defense leaders since taking office last year.
The firings began in February 2025, when Hegseth removed military leaders, including Adm. Lisa Franchetti, the Navy’s top uniformed officer, and Gen. Jim Slife, the No. 2 leader at the Air Force. Trump also fired Gen. Charles “CQ” Brown Jr. as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Showing how sudden the latest move was, Phelan had addressed a large crowd of sailors and industry professionals on Tuesday at the Navy’s annual conference in Washington and spoke with reporters about his agenda. He also hosted the leaders of the House Armed Services Committee to discuss the Navy’s budget request and efforts to build more ships, according to a social media post from his office.
Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said in a post on X that Phelan was “departing the administration, effective immediately.”
Phelan had been a major Trump donor
Phelan had not served in the military or had a civilian leadership role in the service before Trump nominated him for secretary in late 2024. He was seen as an outsider being brought in to shake up the Navy.
Hung Cao speaks during the Republican National Convention on July 16, 2024, in Milwaukee.
Matt Rourke/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Matt Rourke/AP
Phelan was a major donor to Trump’s campaign and had founded the private investment firm Rugger Management LLC. According to his biography, Phelan’s primary exposure to the military came from an advisory position he held on the Spirit of America, a nonprofit that supported the defense of Ukraine and the defense of Taiwan.
The Associated Press could not immediately reach Phelan’s office for comment. The White House did not answer questions and instead responded by sending a link to Parnell’s statement.
Phelan is leaving during a busy time for the Navy. It has three aircraft carriers deployed in or heading to the Middle East, while the Trump administration says all the armed forces are poised to resume combat operations against Iran should the ceasefire expire.
The Navy also has maintained a heavy presence in the Caribbean, where it has been part of a campaign of strikes against alleged drug boats. It also played a major role in the capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro in January.
New acting Navy secretary ran unsuccessful bids for Congress
Taking over as acting secretary is Cao, who ran a failed U.S. Senate bid in Virginia to try to unseat Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine in 2024. He had Trump’s endorsement in the crowded Republican primary and gave a speech at the 2024 Republican National Convention.
Cao’s biography includes fleeing Vietnam with his family as a child in the 1970s. In a campaign video for his Senate bid, he compared Vietnam’s communist regime during the Cold War to the administration of Democratic President Joe Biden.
During his one debate with Kaine, Cao criticized COVID-19 vaccine mandates for service members as well as the military’s diversity, equity and inclusion efforts.
“When you’re using a drag queen to recruit for the Navy, that’s not the people we want,” Cao said from the debate stage. “What we need is alpha males and alpha females who are going to rip out their own guts, eat them and ask for seconds. Those are the young men and women that are going to win wars.”
Trump and Hegseth have railed against DEI in the military, banning the efforts and firing people accused of supporting such programs.
When he ran for Congress in Virginia in 2022, Cao expressed opposition to aid for Ukraine during a debate against his Democratic opponent.
“My heart goes out to the Ukrainian people. … But right now we’re borrowing $55 billion from China to pay for the war in Ukraine. Not only that, we’re depleting our national strategic reserves,” Cao said.
Cao graduated from the prestigious Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Alexandria, Virginia, before attending the U.S. Naval Academy.
He was commissioned as a special operations officer and went on to serve with SEAL teams and special forces in Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia before retiring at the rank of captain, according to his Senate campaign biography.
Cao also earned a master’s degree in physics and had fellowships at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard University.
Since becoming Navy undersecretary, Cao has championed returning to duty service members that refused a Biden-era mandate to take the COVID-19 vaccine.
News
California Candidates to Appear in First Major Debate After Swalwell
Candidates in California’s volatile race for governor will meet Wednesday night for the first televised debate since Eric Swalwell dropped out, each looking to seize momentum in the tight contest.
The debate, being held at the television studio of KRON4 in San Francisco, will include four Democrats and two Republicans who are tightly bunched in recent polls, with many voters still undecided less than six weeks before the June 2 primary.
Mr. Swalwell, a Democrat, had just begun to emerge as a Democratic front-runner when his campaign swiftly collapsed after he was accused of sexual assault in news reports on April 10.
Candidates have taken relatively few risks so far in debates around the state, but every candidate is now eyeing a chance to jump to the front of the pack.
“Even though we have seen some movement in the last couple of weeks, it continues to be a fairly crowded, fractured field,” said Sara Sadhwani, an assistant professor of politics at Pomona College. “So candidates need to be able to grab attention in a debate like this.”
The debate comes as Xavier Becerra, a Democrat and former California attorney general, has enjoyed a surge of support in polls since Mr. Swalwell dropped out of the race.
Mr. Becerra and Matt Mahan, the mayor of San Jose, did not originally meet the threshold to participate in Wednesday’s debate when Mr. Swalwell was running. But they both qualified after receiving enough support in a follow-up poll that debate organizers commissioned once Mr. Swalwell had dropped out.
The other Democrats scheduled to participate are Tom Steyer, a former hedge fund manager, and Katie Porter, a former congresswoman, each of whom have been polling near the top of the Democratic field for several weeks. The Republicans in the debate are Steve Hilton, a former Fox News host who has been endorsed by President Trump, and Chad Bianco, the sheriff of Riverside County.
All candidates run on the same ballot in California’s nonpartisan primary, with the two who receive the most votes advancing to the general election, regardless of their party affiliation. The large number of Democratic candidates has created fear among state party leaders that their voters could splinter, potentially allowing two Republicans to sweep the primary in this heavily Democratic state.
The odds of that happening have decreased since Mr. Swalwell dropped out and another Democrat, Betty Yee, withdrew on Monday. But Rusty Hicks, the chairman of the California Democratic Party, still believes there are too many Democrats in the race and has urged those lagging in polls to end their campaigns. (The actual ballot will include 61 candidates for governor, most of whom are completely unknown to voters.)
The messy race to succeed Gov. Gavin Newsom, who cannot run for re-election because of term limits, has played out as the most unpredictable contest California has seen in a generation. It has attracted a sprawling field but no one with the star power of former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger or the political might of Mr. Newsom or former Gov. Jerry Brown.
Much of California’s Democratic establishment is still figuring out whom to back in the turbulent race.
Mr. Newsom has not endorsed anyone, saying he trusts voters to elect someone “who reflects the values and direction Californians believe in.” Representative Nancy Pelosi, the influential former House speaker from San Francisco, and Senator Alex Padilla also have not announced their favorites. Senator Adam Schiff endorsed Mr. Swalwell earlier this year but quickly withdrew his support after the accusations against him were published.
On Tuesday, Ms. Yee endorsed Mr. Steyer, praising his work to fight climate change and engage young voters. Mr. Steyer has swamped his competitors with a raft of advertising by pouring $134 million from his personal fortune into his campaign.
Also on Tuesday, Mr. Becerra, whose campaign had appeared to be flailing until Mr. Swalwell dropped out, received the endorsement of Robert Rivas, the Democratic speaker of the California State Assembly. Mr. Rivas said he had encouraged Mr. Becerra to run for governor because he was impressed by his work as California’s attorney general during President Trump’s first term.
“He understands both the policy and the politics,” Mr. Rivas said in an interview. “And he has a track record, in my opinion, of delivering results under pressure.”
The 90-minute debate on Wednesday begins at 7 p.m. PT and will be broadcast and streamed by KRON and other California stations.
-
New Mexico5 minutes ago14 indicted in alleged Permian Basin crude‑oil theft scheme spanning New Mexico and Texas, prosecutors say
-
North Carolina11 minutes ago
Tiny town in North Carolina honors towering Andre The Giant with roadside marker
-
North Dakota17 minutes agoQB Caden Gutzmer cites championship culture in choosing North Dakota
-
Ohio22 minutes agoMary Lucille Young, Youngstown, Ohio
-
Oklahoma29 minutes agoOKC Thunder Announce Starting Lineup Against Suns In Game 2
-
Oregon35 minutes ago5-star QB Will Mencl reveals what led to Oregon commitment
-
Pennsylvania40 minutes agoMid Valley students tour Pennsylvania American Water treatment plant
-
Rhode Island47 minutes agoR.I. grandparents fighting for visits with 4-year-old granddaughter rest their case – The Boston Globe