Overnight Energy: EPA moves to roll back chemical plant safety rule | NASA chief says humans contribute to climate change | Pruitt gets outside lawyer

by Miranda Green and Timothy Cama - 05/17/18 5:33 PM ET

EPA WANTS TO ROLL BACK CHEMICAL PLANT SAFETY RULE: The Trump administration wants to roll back some key parts of a major Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule meant to reduce the risks of chemical plant disasters.

The proposal to tweak the Risk Management Program rule aligns with the wishes of the chemical industry, which argued that the original January 2017 regulation from the Obama administration was too expensive and unnecessarily burdensome.

From the top: “Accident prevention is a top priority at EPA, and this proposed rule will ensure proper emergency planning and continue the trend of fewer significant accidents involving chemicals,” EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said in a Thursday statement announcing the proposal.

“The rule proposes to reduce unnecessary regulatory burdens, address the concerns of stakeholders and emergency responders on the ground, and save Americans roughly $88 million a year.”

What the roll back would entail: Thursday’s proposal would eliminate or ease some major pieces of the rule, including requirements that plant owners consider safer alternatives to various technologies, get third-party audits to check for compliance with accident prevention rules, conduct “root cause” analyses after incidents and disclose certain information to the community about operations.

Other big parts of the rule now have delayed implementation dates, like provisions on coordination with local emergency services and exercises for emergency situations.

The EPA argued that those changes, sought by industry groups and companies, would answer security concerns, reduce unnecessary regulatory costs and better align the standards with worker safety rules.

The $88 million estimated savings would come mostly from removing the requirement to consider safer alternatives, with other savings coming from eliminating audits and root-cause investigations.

Why it matters: The Risk Management Plan rule is a prime example of the Trump administration’s environmental agenda: implementing regulatory rollbacks long sought by industry and the GOP in an attempt to reduce costs.

But the chemical rule has also been one of the most vocally contested Trump administration rollbacks. The EPA delayed its implementation multiple times — and went to court to defend the delays — while it figured out what revisions to make.

The rule has also provided key arguments for greens and Democrats against the Trump agenda. They see the Obama rule as a strong attempt to stop chemical plant disasters, and the Trump actions as increasing those risks.

What’s next: In the coming days, the proposal will be published in the Federal Register, opening a 60-day public comment period.

The EPA would then have to analyze those comments before it can make the changes final. That action would open the rule to lawsuits, which are nearly guaranteed, from environmentalists and Democratic states.

We break it all down here.

TRUMP’S NASA CHIEF SAYS HUMANS CONTRIBUTING TO CLIMATE CHANGE: A former Republican lawmaker and newly confirmed head of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) says that climate change is happening and humans are contributing to climate change in a “major way.”

Speaking to employees at his first town hall Thursday, Jim Bridenstine said, “I don’t deny the consensus that the climate is changing in fact I fully believe and know that the climate is changing. I also know that we human beings are contributing to it in a major way.”

He added: “Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. We are putting it to the atmosphere in volumes that we haven’t seen and that greenhouse gas is warming the planet. That is absolutely happening and we are responsible for it.

Bridenstine, a former Oklahoma Congressman, was narrowly confirmed to lead NASA in April after facing a months-long confirmation process due to Democratic and some Republican opposition to his nomination.

Democrats argued that he was unqualified for the high-profile scientific spot and too divisive of a politician. As a Republican, Bridenstine had a clear record of denying humans are adding to climate change.

Why the change is notable: During his Senate confirmation last November, Bridenstine wouldn’t say how much humans were contributing to climate change.

“I believe carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. I believe that humans are contributing to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere,” he said.

Asked if they were the primary cause of global warming Bridenstine responded, “It’s going to depend on a whole lot of factors, and we’re still learning more about that every day. In some years, you could say absolutely. In other years, during sun cycles and other things, there are other contributing factors that would have more of an impact.”