Of Counsel Justin Smith (Washington, DC) recently spoke with Law.com about the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) decision to rescind its 2009 Endangerment Finding, a move that removes the legal foundation for federal greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions standards under the Clean Air Act. B&D wrote about these developments in a client alert.

In “End of EPA's Endangerment Finding Creates Regulatory Cloud for Businesses, Lawyers Say,” Justin explained that the shift creates significant uncertainty for regulated industries, particularly vehicle manufacturers that must make long-term investment and production decisions years in advance. “Vehicle manufacturers have timelines that are so far out, it creates a lot of difficulty for them,” he noted, emphasizing the challenge of planning amid policy swings that could change again under a future administration.

He also highlighted open questions surrounding stationary source regulation and state-level responses. While EPA did not address power plants, refineries, and manufacturing facilities in its announcement, Justin observed that the agency’s legal rationale could undermine the basis for regulating those sources. At the same time, he suggested that if the federal government steps back, states may believe they have greater room to act.

Justin further pointed out that EPA’s decision to rely on legal arguments—rather than revisiting the scientific record supporting the original finding—was likely strategic. “If they relied on science, that arguably would've left room for a future administration to reconsider the science,” he said. “And relying on pure law gets them out of that scenario.”

Beveridge & Diamond’s Air and Climate Change practice group helps clients navigate all aspects of compliance and enforcement with Clean Air Act regulations, including those impacting mobile sources. Our experience and capabilities extend to: required or voluntary disclosures, interactions with sustainability rating agencies, supply chain and product stewardship, interactions with suppliers and customers, responsible sourcing, human rights, climate change law and policy, GHG emissions credit trading, environmental justice, facility issues, and more. We frequently assist clients in commenting on, and bringing administrative challenges to, EPA rulemakings. Combining forces with our deep regulatory teams, our litigators represent clients in administrative rulemakings and appellate matters in numerous state and federal courts, including the D.C. Circuit and U.S. Supreme Court. B&D was part of a state/industry coalition that won a rare Supreme Court stay of the EPA "Good Neighbor" air emissions rule in Ohio v. Environmental Protection Agency.