On March 12th, 2025, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced 31 major actions, what he termed “the largest deregulatory announcement in U.S. history.” The announcement aligns with President Trump’s Day One executive orders and EPA’s previously announced “Powering the Great American Comeback” initiative. Zeldin’s priorities are to advance environmental protection while unleashing American energy, lowering living costs, revitalizing the auto industry, and restoring the rule of law. Key regulatory changes include reconsidering the Clean Power Plan, the particulate matter (PM_2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS), certain NSPS and NESHAP regulations, and Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program.

In line with criticism of the previous administration’s regulatory efforts, the announced rollbacks are expected to reinvigorate U.S. energy production, improve manufacturing opportunities, and bring back auto jobs to the country. In alignment with the actions announced by EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, Indiana Governor Mike Braun signed Executive Order 25-38 on March 12th, 2025, which restricts Indiana from adopting new environmental regulations more stringent than federal standards unless explicitly mandated by state law or deemed essential.

In this article, we will explore several significant environmental policy changes proposed in the March 12 announcement, provide an overview of some issues that are being reconsidered, and discuss how they could impact facilities in Indiana. Trinity will be providing regular updates on these topics as additional details are released about future EPA, IDEM, court rulings, and congressional actions.

The Clean Power Plan (CPP), first introduced in 2015 under the Obama administration, aimed to reduce carbon emissions from power plants, which are major contributors to climate change. The CPP set emissions reduction targets for states, encouraging a shift from coal to cleaner energy sources like natural gas, solar, and wind. The 2015 plan was broadly opposed by industry stakeholders and aligned States, and the first Trump administration repealed it in 2019, citing concerns over its economic impact. CPP was replaced with a less stringent regulation, the “Affordable Clean Energy (ACE)” plan. The Biden administration, emphasizing bold actions to combat climate change, began efforts to reinstate or strengthen the CPP. However, a 2022 Supreme Court decision in West Virginia v. EPA, limited the EPA’s authority to regulate emissions from power plants under the Clean Air Act, creating a new “major questions doctrine” to restrict agencies from making broad regulatory decisions without clear congressional authorization. Another noteworthy Supreme Court decision during this time period was in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which overturned Chevron v. NRDC further constraining agency authority.

In 2024, the EPA retooled the regulatory framework surrounding the CPP, now referred to as Clean Power Plan 2.0, and included aggressive schedules for reducing CO₂ emissions from new and existing power plants (including mandatory carbon capture in some cases). The new rule has faced criticism for attempting to address the court’s ruling while maintaining similar fuel-shifting objectives previously blocked. Supporters argue that strict regulations on power plants are needed to curb emissions in light of the seriousness of the threat posed by climate change, while critics raise concerns about potential impacts on energy prices and job markets in certain industries. Ultimately, the success of Clean Power Plan 2.0, and its impact on Indiana facilities, will depend on how it navigates the complex intersection of environmental goals, legal constraints, and political pressures.

While the CPP reboot was to broadly impact the electric generation sector, a regulation with even broader reach was the Biden administration’s reconsideration of the fine particulate matter (PM_2.5) national ambient air quality standard. The Biden EPA aggressively lowered the level of the NAAQS to 9.0 µg/m³ from 12.0 µg/m³, an even greater reduction than some public health advocates expected to see.

Critics argued (correctly in many cases) that the new regulation would stop numerous air permit projects in their tracks, as the new NAAQS was set so low that it was at or below the background level of ambient particulate in many parts of the country, including some counties in Indiana. Major expansion plans for broad sectors of industry (steelmaking, petrochemicals, pulp and paper, etc.) have been delayed or paused due to an inability to meet dispersion modeling requirements based on the new NAAQS. Proponents of the new regulation have argued that impacts to industrial expansion are exaggerated, while the new standard provides the margin of safety to protect public health that is required by law.

The Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP), after being funded through 2009 legislation, has been an essential tool for tracking emissions from thousands of industrial facilities across the U.S., requiring facilities to calculate and report their greenhouse gas emissions annually. However, the costs associated with compliance—estimated to exceed $690 million annually—have sparked debate.

The EPA announced its reconsideration of the GHGRP, including revisiting the “Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for Data Elements Under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule” and the “Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases,” along with amendments. These revisions are driven by concerns from industry stakeholders regarding the burdensome nature of some monitoring requirements, particularly for smaller oil and gas producers. The reconsideration need not extend to the 2024 Methane Waste Emissions Charge (WEC) rule, which was repealed by a Congressional Review Act resolution in late February.

The agency believes these changes could improve the accuracy of emission estimates, particularly in sectors like landfills, and streamline reporting requirements across other industries, potentially reducing the burden on reporters. However, critics warn that these revisions might slow efforts to monitor and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions effectively, hindering progress toward a low-carbon economy. Given the age of the program, however, it is unclear at this time whether EPA intends to reconsider only the recent amendments, or the GHGRP as a whole. Unlike core Clean Air Act programs such as the NAAQS, GHGRP has a relatively marginal status within the overall legislative framework.

While there is no immediate change to reporting requirements for reporting year 2024, the reporting deadline has been extended to May 30, 2025 per rulemaking published on March 20, 2025.

Significant changes have been made by the new federal administration affecting Environmental Justice (EJ). Executive Orders 14167 and 14171, executed on January 20 and 21, 2025, effectively ended many federal EJ initiatives. Included with the Executive Order 14167 is direction to “terminate, to the maximum extent allowable by the law, all DEI, DEIA, and ‘environmental justice’ offices and positions,” among other directives. DEI(A) refers to “Diversity, Equity, Inclusiveness (and Accessibility),” a broad set of initiatives focused on improving the fairness of corporate and government activities for minority groups. Multiple EJ-related resources have been taken down, such as EJScreen and CEJST on February 6th, 2025. At the same time, the newly formed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has announced the cancellation of numerous EJ- and DEI-related contracts.

The 2025 Executive Order was largely focused on rescinding a 2021 Executive Order on the same topic. Given that the 2021 order was not accompanied by any basic legal changes, this will not immediately or directly impact state- and local-level policies, regulations, or legislation (e.g., criteria for public notice, comment, meetings, impact assessments, or promulgated/issued state laws or rules). Indiana Governor Mike Braun signed Executive Order 25-37 on March 12, 2025, which prohibits state agencies from incorporating “environmental justice” considerations (e.g., race, ethnicity, or social factors) into environmental permitting, enforcement, or grant decisions.

The ongoing developments in environmental policy reflect the complex balancing act between addressing climate change, economic considerations, and regulatory authority. From reconsidering the Clean Power Plan to revisiting key regulatory programs, the challenges of mitigating environmental impact while maintaining economic stability and industry competitiveness remain central. The debates surrounding the future of the EPA’s regulations—on topics ranging from greenhouse gas reporting to air pollution—highlight the differing perspectives on how best to achieve a sustainable and equitable future. As these policies continue to evolve, finding solutions that promote environmental protection while considering the diverse needs of industry, communities, and the economy will be essential in shaping the path forward.

 

The Trinity team actively tracks the implications of both federal and state elections and the impacts of proposed policy changes to the broader environmental regulations industry. Our subject matter experts can help advise clients across a variety of industries, from data centers to the oil and gas industry, on how their business may be impacted by upcoming changes in policy and rulemaking. For next steps, reach out to Emily Stewart from our Indianapolis office.