EPA scraps mercury rule math in effort critics say will hamper regulation of pollution
“The Trump administration must be mindful to adopt a position that will endure legal challenges, which means proper use of cost-benefit analysis,” said Devin Hartman, director of energy and environment policy for the R Street Institute. “This means accounting for direct and indirect costs and benefits.”
Even so, Hartman said accounting for indirect costs and benefits could still lead to “the conclusion that it is not appropriate and necessary to pursue a regulation primarily justified by reducing a criteria pollutant through a vehicle intended for toxic air pollutants.”
