EPA Moves to Roll Back Emissions Rule Impacting Neighboring States

Wed Feb 04 2026 04:56:55 GMT+0200 (Eastern European Standard Time)

The Trump administration's EPA proposes to approve state-specific ozone plans, potentially easing regulations protecting downwind areas from air pollution.

The EPA announced a proposal to roll back the 'Good Neighbor' rule that imposes limits on emissions across state lines. Eight states are set to have more autonomy in regulating ozone pollution, a change criticized by environmentalists for potentially worsening air quality in surrounding areas.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced on Wednesday a proposal to approve plans from eight states to independently regulate ozone air pollution, signaling a significant rollback of the stringent ‘Good Neighbor’ rule established to limit emissions affecting downwind regions.

The ‘Good Neighbor’ rule aimed to curb air pollution from sources such as coal-fired power plants that could adversely impact neighboring states. However, under the leadership of EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, this regulation has been targeted for reconsideration following a Supreme Court ruling in 2024 which restricted the EPA's enforcement capabilities regarding interstate air quality issues.

If the proposal is finalized, the states involved—Alabama, Arizona, Kentucky, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico, and Tennessee—will gain more freedom in managing their ozone emissions without the need for federal approval. This shift comes after the EPA under President Joe Biden disapproved or indicated disapproval of ozone plans submitted by these states, citing insufficient measures to control cross-state pollution.

Zeldin framed the decision as an essential move towards “cooperative federalism,” allowing states the autonomy to customize their pollution control strategies. He stated that this approach represents a balanced method to achieve air quality goals without imposing excessive federal requirements.

Many environmental advocates, however, express significant concern, labeling the proposal as detrimental to public health. They argue that granting leeway to these states could exacerbate air pollution problems in areas like the Northeast, where toxins from states such as Indiana and Ohio often travel and compromise air quality.

Critics like Sierra Club attorney Zachary Fabish have condemned the move as a reward for states with poor pollution records, suggesting it undermines federal efforts aimed at ensuring clean air standards across states. The EPA will open a public comment period, lasting at least 30 days after publishing the proposal in the Federal Register, allowing citizens to voice their opinions on the matter.