On July 30, 2024, The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit temporarily halted litigation over the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) updated Risk Management Program (RMP) rule and granted a four-month abeyance. The final RMP rule was published on March 22, 2024.
The order granting the abeyance allows EPA time to reconsider the RMP rule while addressing a petition for reconsideration from industry groups that challenges several of its provisions. This provides EPA with an opportunity to adjust or rollback the new rule, particularly if there is an administration change based on the presidential election in November.
Substantively, the petitioners argue that the new RMP rule imposes excessive and unnecessary burdens on facilities and are challenging several aspects of the updated rule, including its requirement for facilities to conduct Safer Technology and Alternatives Analyses and its expanded mandates on emergency response, chemical process safety, public disclosures, and employee training. In particular, the petitioners contend that the new provisions create substantial compliance costs without necessarily enhancing safety. They further argue that the rule's requirements are overly prescriptive and duplicate existing regulations, such as those of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
The petitioners also claim that procedural flaws in the rulemaking process, such as the lack of opportunity for public comment on new provisions, further undermine the rule's legitimacy. They argue that the final rule introduced several new legal and technical justifications that were not present during the proposal phase, which they believe violates the Administrative Procedure Act.
Ultimately, the court's decision to grant the abeyance provides EPA with time to reconsider the rule's provisions. As a result, further changes to a beleaguered rule may be on the horizon. We will continue to provide updates on the RMP rule and related litigation.
This article is presented for informational purposes only and is not intended to constitute legal advice.