Cookie Control

This site uses cookies to store information on your computer.

Some cookies on this site are essential, and the site won't work as expected without them. These cookies are set when you submit a form, login or interact with the site by doing something that goes beyond clicking on simple links.

We also use some non-essential cookies to anonymously track visitors or enhance your experience of the site. If you're not happy with this, we won't set these cookies but some nice features of the site may be unavailable.

By using our site you accept the terms of our Privacy Policy.

(One cookie will be set to store your preference)
(Ticking this sets a cookie to hide this popup if you then hit close. This will not store any personal information)

"Trump’s E.P.A. to Rewrite Rules Aimed at Averting Chemical Disasters"

"The Biden-era rules require thousands of hazardous-chemical sites to adopt new safeguards against storms, spills and other risks."

"The Trump administration has moved to rewrite rules designed to prevent disasters at thousands of chemical facilities across the country.

The Environmental Protection Agency filed a motion in federal court on Thursday pulling back the safety regulations, introduced last year under former president Joe Biden. The rules, which took effect in May, require sites that handle hazardous chemicals to adopt new safeguards including explicit measures to prepare for storms, floods and other climate-related risks.

They also require some facilities to scrutinize their use of particularly dangerous chemicals and switch to safer alternatives as well as to share more information with neighbors and emergency responders. In addition, facilities that have suffered prior accidents also must undergo independent audits.

President Trump’s E.P.A. intends to rewrite those rules, the agency said in a filing with the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. That essentially makes moot a legal challenge launched last year by a group of Republican Attorneys-General, as well as the chemicals industry, which argued that the rules imposed undue burdens on companies with little safety benefit."

Hiroko Tabuchi reports for the New York Times March 6, 2025.

Source: NYTimes, 03/07/2025