EPA’s Proposed Repeal of Power Plant Rules Sparks Debate Over Climate, Cost, and Grid Reliability

In a move with significant implications for U.S. climate policy and energy infrastructure, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on June 11 proposed repealing two major environmental regulations from the Biden-Harris Administration. These include greenhouse gas (GHG) standards for power plants under the Clean Air Act and certain amendments to the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS). The EPA claims the repeal would save the power sector $1.2 billion annually, improve electric reliability, and promote American energy independence. But the proposals have triggered strong reactions from both environmental advocates and power sector stakeholders.

The EPA's Case for Repeal

Announced by EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin during a press conference with several Republican lawmakers and Navajo Nation President Buu Nygren, the proposed rules target what the agency calls “burdensome” regulations that disproportionately affect coal-, oil-, and gas-fired plants.

“Affordable, reliable electricity is key to the American dream,” said Zeldin, criticizing the previous regulations as part of a “narrow-minded climate change zealotry.”

EPA argues that the repealed rules — originally designed to limit carbon and toxic air emissions — would have led to premature plant closures, increased energy prices, and greater dependency on foreign energy sources. The agency is also challenging the legal foundation for regulating GHG emissions from fossil fuel plants, arguing they do not significantly contribute to dangerous air pollution under the Clean Air Act.

The repeal includes undoing the Biden Administration’s 2024 Clean Air Act rule, which aimed to cut carbon emissions by relying on emerging technologies like carbon capture and sequestration. Similarly, the rollback of the 2024 MATS amendments would reinstate the 2012 standards, which the EPA says already led to significant emissions reductions.

NRDC’s Perspective:

Environmental advocates, led by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), criticized the move. President and CEO of NRDC Manish Bapna warned of severe consequences for public health and the climate.

“The EPA is hoisting the white flag of surrender on the power plant pollution that's poisoning the air we breathe and harming our climate,” Bapna said.

The NRDC argues that repealing the GHG standards would increase carbon emissions from the nation’s largest industrial polluters — power plants — worsening extreme weather and respiratory illnesses. The group also contends that undoing stricter mercury and air toxics standards would expose communities to increased levels of neurotoxic pollutants like mercury and arsenic.

Environmental lawyers are expected to challenge the proposals in court, citing what they view as violations of the EPA’s statutory obligations and recent legal precedents.

NRECA’s View:

In contrast, the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA), representing utility co-ops across the country, applauded the EPA’s move. CEO Jim Matheson framed the Biden-era regulations as unworkable and legally questionable.

“These rules force power plants into premature retirement and handcuff how often new natural gas plants can run,” Matheson said. “They are textbook examples of bad energy policy.”

NRECA maintains that many of the technologies mandated by the Biden rules — especially carbon capture — are not yet viable at scale. The group also argues that compliance would drive up electricity costs and reduce reliability, particularly in rural and lower-income regions dependent on legacy coal and gas infrastructure.

By repealing these rules, Matheson says the EPA is “correcting course” and aligning policy with practical, cost-effective approaches to meeting growing energy demand.

Legal and Policy Implications

The proposals revisit long-standing debates over the role of the Clean Air Act in regulating climate change and whether EPA has the authority to set wide-ranging rules that shift the U.S. energy mix.

The Biden Administration's rules had been crafted in part as a response to the 2022 Supreme Court decision in West Virginia v. EPA, which limited the agency’s ability to implement broad carbon regulations without explicit Congressional approval.

Now, by seeking to repeal those efforts, the EPA is not just walking back recent policy — but potentially redefining the agency’s future role in addressing climate change through power sector regulation.

What Comes Next

The EPA has opened a public comment period for both proposals. If finalized, the repeals would begin impacting power plant planning and emissions strategy as early as 2026.