House Republicans have introduced two bills that would relax several Clean Air Act new source review (NSR) permitting requirements, which could help industry groups achieve some of the NSR overhauls that they have urged EPA to make as part of its ongoing regulatory review initiative weighing revisions to agency policies.

EPA's proposed rule setting renewable fuel standard (RFS) blending goals for 2018 indicates that the agency sees the potential for a progressively worsening long-term obstacle to increased ethanol use in the "blend wall," the limit on how much ethanol can be blended into the fuel supply given infrastructure and vehicle constraints.

EPA's just-released 2018 renewable fuel standard (RFS) proposal calls for maintaining 2017 requirements that in effect call for blending 15 billion gallons of conventional, corn-based, renewable fuel -- though the plan would also use EPA's waiver authority to lower volumes for low-carbon cellulosic biofuel below legislative targets.

An open government advocacy group is suing EPA over the agency's alleged failure to respond to its Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for information on agency Administrator Scott Pruitt's relationship with fossil fuel companies, and about presidential adviser Carl Icahn's input on renewable fuel standard (RFS) policy.

Volvo's announcement that all of its new car models beginning in 2019 will be hybrids or electric vehicles -- signaling an end to a reliance on gasoline- or diesel-only powertrains -- is boosting backers of EPA's vehicle greenhouse gas rules who say it highlights an industry shift to clean vehicles that runs counter to any Trump administration moves to weaken the standards.

The draft EPA proposal to repeal the Clean Power Plan (CPP) currently under review by the White House is thought to include as one justification for rolling back the Obama-era rule the argument that EPA is barred from regulating coal plants' greenhouse gases under section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act because it already regulates their air toxics under section 112.

The White House budget office has released new guidance for fiscal year 2019 reiterating that EPA could see a slight increase over what the administration sought for FY18, though the office touts the request as an opportunity to present a "comprehensive plan" for "reforming" the government and cutting its workforce, telegraphing continued steep cuts despite signs of Capitol Hill blowback.

EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) panel members are questioning many of the agency's assumptions in its method for reviewing health risks from air toxics emitted by a host of industries, saying the approach might be too conservative by capturing too many emissions sources and could create too much work for EPA.

Democratic lawmakers are strongly criticizing Jeffrey Clark, President Donald Trump's nominee to head the Justice Department's (DOJ) environment division, suggesting his prior antipathy toward climate regulation and his private sector work defending industry clients could drive him to help undermine EPA climate and environmental protections.

The House Energy & Commerce Committee June 28 voted to approve H.R. 806, a bill that would delay by eight years the implementation of EPA's tougher 2015 ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) and make far-reaching changes to the Clean Air Act that Democrats warn will harm public health.

A coalition of 15 attorneys general (AGs) lead by New York AG Eric Schneiderman (D) is threatening to sue EPA for unreasonable delay in issuing methane emissions limits for existing oil and gas operations, ratcheting up a confrontation with the Trump EPA as it retreats from Obama-era climate strategies.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has denied farm groups' petition for rehearing of the court's recent decision requiring animal feeding operations (AFOs) to report certain air emissions, effectively ending the litigation unless the groups ask the Supreme Court to review the ruling.

Trump administration critics say calls by EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt and other cabinet officials for a "red team, blue team" approach to refine climate change science would mislead the public because scientific findings already undergo a rigorous peer-review process and the new approach would give unwarranted weight to claims made by a small percentage of climate skeptics.