A Quick Overview:
In March 2025, the Trump administration opened an unprecedented pathway for coal plants, chemical manufacturers, medical sterilizers, and petroleum refineries to bypass key Clean Air Act pollution requirements, all via a single email. By invoking a provision of the law that had never before been used in its 55-year history, the White House granted more than 180 industrial facilities across 38 states and Puerto Rico a two-year exemption from pollution limits, without meaningful scientific review and without informing the 250,000 Americans living within a mile of those facilities. Legal challenges are now active in federal court, and the full scope of the public health consequences is only beginning to come into view.
The letter that arrived in the EPA’s inbox in the spring of 2025 was not a legal brief, not a formal application, and not a detailed environmental impact assessment. It was a casual inquiry. “Hello, I am a gas company looking for an exemption. How do I start?” one businessman wrote in an email to the EPA. He was not alone in his confusion. Across the country, executives at coal plants, chemical factories, and petroleum refineries had been told, with just a few weeks’ notice, that they could request a presidential dispensation from foundational Clean Air Act requirements. They just had to ask.
What followed was one of the most consequential environmental rollbacks in modern American history. Not through an act of Congress, not through formal rulemaking, and not through any process that gave the public a chance to respond. It happened through an email inbox.
The EPA set up an electronic mailbox to allow the regulated community to request a presidential exemption under the Clean Air Act, covering a host of Biden-era rules. The administration described it, in the words of EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, as “the greatest day of deregulation,” with a vow to dismantle 31 separate Clean Air Act protections. What that phrase meant for the millions of people living near exempted facilities told a very different story.
The Legal Mechanism: A Dormant Provision Activated
President Trump exploited a narrowly defined provision of the Clean Air Act, Section 112(i)(4), which allows the president to grant exemptions from air toxics regulations in very limited circumstances, specifically where technology to implement the standard is “not available” and where an exemption is in the national security interests of the United States. This provision had sat unused for 55 years and was meant for true national security emergencies where pollution controls are genuinely unavailable.
In 2025 alone, President Trump invoked this authority seven times, and not one of the presidential proclamations provides a meaningful, legitimate technological or national security basis for the exemptions, according to the NRDC, which is challenging the Trump administration’s illegal exemptions of roughly one-third of the nation’s coal-fired power plants from the 2024 Mercury and Air Toxics Standards.
The Clean Air Act allows the president to exempt stationary sources of air pollution from compliance with any standard under Section 112 for up to two years, with the possibility of extending that by another two years. That renewal possibility means what began as a two-year pause could, in practice, become open-ended relief for some of the most powerful industrial polluters in the country.
The Rules That Were Bypassed
The EPA allowed companies to request exemptions from the revised Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) as well as measures governing emissions from sterilizers, synthetic organic chemical manufacturers, rubber tire manufacturers, copper smelters, and various steel-sector facilities. These were not obscure technical standards. Before MATS was established in 2012, there were no federal limits on how much mercury and toxic air pollution coal and oil-fired power plants could emit. The standards led to a 90% reduction in mercury emissions, an 80% drop in other metals, and helped save up to 11,000 lives each year.
The 2024 Biden-era rules would have reduced allowable mercury pollution from coal plants by 70%, emissions of nickel, arsenic, lead and other toxic metals by two-thirds, and resulted in health cost savings of $420 million through 2037, according to the Environmental Defense Fund. In February 2026, the EPA finalized the repeal of those 2024 enhancements, reverting to the older 2012 standards.
The Inbox: 3,000 Pages and Counting
Within two weeks of the administration’s invitation, executives across major industries began flooding an inbox set up to receive and funnel requests from the EPA to the White House, asking that their facilities be excused from expensive Clean Air Act requirements. At least 3,000 pages of emails were sent to and from this inbox in the weeks that followed.
The requests ranged from detailed multi-page corporate arguments to baffling single-line notes. Others appeared to mock the administration’s regulatory rollback, with one email calling for a coal power plant to be built on a 300-foot-wide mangrove island just offshore of the president’s Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida. “It will produce power so strongly that jobs and power will be the best that people have ever seen,” the email stated.
The outcome was not affected by any of that. More than 180 facilities in 38 states and Puerto Rico received, by presidential decision, a two-year reprieve from following the latest Clean Air Act rules. About 250,000 people live within a mile of these facilities, according to EPA and U.S. Census Bureau data collected by the Environmental Defense Fund. The majority are coal power plants and medical sterilizers.
Many of the coal plants’ requests for exemptions admitted that they already had the control technologies needed to lower their pollution to the tighter limits for mercury and other toxic metals – but they still received a pass. Every coal plant that asked for an exemption received the same two-year reprieve, the maximum allowed by law, even those that asked for shorter exemption periods and plants with formal plans to retire their coal units on quicker timelines.
Once the first presidential proclamation was released, additional plants that had not initially requested an exemption wrote in to demand one, without even attempting to assert that relevant technology was unavailable or that they met the Clean Air Act’s statutory criteria. They were quickly also granted exemptions.
Case Studies: Who Got the Pass, and Why
Coal Burning Bitcoin
One request that illustrates the breadth of the exemption program came from Richard Shaffer, asset manager at Scrubgrass Reclamation Company. Shaffer emailed asking for an exemption covering a western Pennsylvania power plant that burns coal waste, with a significant portion of its electricity used to mine bitcoin. Keeping the cost of environmental compliance low was important “for the security of the United States,” Shaffer wrote. A response came 11 days later in a presidential proclamation: approved.
Ethylene Oxide and Medical Sterilizers
Kevin Wagner, vice president of the medical sterilizer company Sterigenics, messaged asking that nine facilities emitting the carcinogenic gas ethylene oxide, including near Salt Lake City, Los Angeles, Charlotte, and Atlanta, be exempted. More than 45,000 people, most of them not white, live within a mile of these facilities, according to federal data.
Ethylene oxide is not a marginal risk. In 2016, the EPA concluded that ethylene oxide was 30 times more carcinogenic than previously thought for people who continuously inhale it as adults, and 50 times more carcinogenic for those who are exposed since birth. A 2024 Biden EPA rule would have reduced emissions of ethylene oxide from chemical sterilizers by 92%. The Trump administration subsequently granted two-year renewable exemptions from these regulations for 40 sterilizer facilities nationwide.
The company itself has a significant legal history with the gas. In April 2025, Sterigenics settled 97 lawsuits and agreed to pay $31 million to people harmed by ethylene oxide emitted by its plant in Willowbrook, Illinois. In a 2023 settlement regarding the same plant, Sterigenics paid $408 million to people who alleged illness due to ethylene oxide emissions.
Petroleum Refineries with Violation Histories
A Citgo Petroleum Corporation lawyer sought exemptions for petroleum refineries in Illinois, Louisiana, and Texas, all of which had been hit with Clean Air Act violations in recent years. The rule at issue, the EPA had previously concluded, would “provide critical health protections to hundreds of thousands of people living near chemical plants.”
The Blanket Industry Ask
The most sweeping request did not come from a single company. The American Chemistry Council and American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, two trade groups representing chemical manufacturers, sent a letter requesting a blanket exemption for their roughly 640 member companies. The groups warned that without a presidential exemption, “companies will evaluate whether to shut down units or offshore their operations,” a claim environmental attorneys characterized as unfounded, as reported by Salon.
Science Sidelined
The administration’s handling of the exemption process did not involve the agency with the most relevant expertise. The EPA’s air quality experts played no meaningful role in determining whether a facility should be handed an exemption to the rules, according to the agency itself. An EPA spokesperson confirmed that any requests sent to the EPA’s electronic mailbox were simply forwarded to the White House.
Rank-and-file agency staff also had little understanding of how the process would run. A political appointee who had previously worked for a utility and a petrochemicals trade group played a key role in creating the inbox where companies sent their requests, according to records obtained by the Environmental Defense Fund.
Regulations built on public comment, extensive scientific review, and technical agency expertise were suspended via unilateral executive action, without notice to nearby communities, without an opportunity for meaningful engagement, and without any independent guardrails. President Trump’s proclamation invokes the never-before-used Clean Air Act provision to extend compliance deadlines by two years, claiming the technology is “not available” and that exemptions serve national security. A federal lawsuit contends those assertions are baseless, noting that many of the required controls and practices are already in use.
Enforcement History Ignored
One striking element of the exemption approvals is who received them. More than 70 of the exempted facilities had faced formal enforcement action in the past five years for violations such as emitting contaminants above regulatory limits and failing to properly track their pollution. A substantial portion of the facilities handed relief from cleaner air rules had already demonstrated a pattern of non-compliance with existing regulations.
None of the exemption requests included any meaningful analysis of how the additional pollution would threaten the health of people living nearby.
Environmental Justice Dimensions
The communities most affected by these exemptions are not distributed evenly across the population. All of the exempted sterilizer facilities are located near residential areas and primarily impact overburdened communities of color or communities in low-wealth areas. Some exempted facilities can now also ignore air monitoring and quarterly reporting requirements, eliminating the accountability tools that communities near these sites depend on.
Neighborhoods next to chemical plants, power plants, commercial sterilizers, and metal processing sites in Texas, California, Utah, Louisiana, Ohio, Illinois, Michigan, Kentucky, and West Virginia face the worst of this continuing pollution. Some of the protections being delayed, like the HON standards for chemical manufacturers, prevent over 6,000 tons of toxic emissions each year and help protect more than 7 million people, many of them children, from breathing chemicals linked to cancer, asthma, and birth defects.
For communities already carrying a disproportionate burden of industrial pollution, the health risks from toxic air exposure are well-documented. According to the American Lung Association, “exposure to fine particulate matter causes a host of harms to the lungs, including asthma attacks, airway inflammation and premature death, as well as cardiovascular, developmental and reproductive harm.”
Legal Challenges and What Comes Next
The exemptions have not gone uncontested. The organizations challenging those exemptions in court include NRDC, Environmental Defense Fund, Environmental Integrity Project, and Environmental Justice Health Alliance for Chemical Policy Reform, alongside Texas Environmental Justice Advocacy Services, Louisiana Environmental Action Network, Concerned Citizens of St. John, and groups represented by Earthjustice.
The lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia challenges President Trump’s proclamation granting pollution exemptions that had been requested by email, sidestepping any form of public process and contravening the statutory framework. The central legal argument is that the administration did not meet the statute’s own requirements – that the relevant technology is genuinely unavailable and that granting the exemptions genuinely serves national security – and that the president exceeded his authority by granting mass categorical exemptions rather than the facility-specific, evidence-based determinations Congress contemplated.
Critics are also concerned that this move may set a precedent for future administrations, potentially altering the balance of power between regulatory agencies and the executive branch, and limiting the EPA’s ability to effectively enforce air quality standards going forward.
Read More: Air Pollution Linked to Higher Dementia Risk: Study
What This Means for You
The scale and speed of this deregulatory action is without modern precedent. A provision of the Clean Air Act that sat unused for 55 years was activated not to address a genuine emergency but to provide industrial relief to companies, some of which had existing violation records, some of which already had the technology needed to comply, and some of which were mining bitcoin with coal waste.
EPA data shows that sulfur dioxide pollution from coal plants increased 18 percent in 2025, with the plants that were given presidential exemptions leading the way. The 2024 MATS standards would have required the dirtiest plants to make meaningful reductions in mercury and toxic metals. Those gains are now at risk. If the administration’s ethylene oxide proposal is finalized, modeling suggests an additional 7.8 tons of ethylene oxide will be emitted per year by facilities that would otherwise have been required to cut their emissions sharply.
For readers, several things are worth monitoring closely. Federal litigation challenging the exemptions is active and ongoing. The administration has not disclosed its decisions on additional pending categories of exemption requests, meaning more approvals could follow. The EPA has also eliminated a requirement that power plants install cost-effective systems to continuously monitor their emissions, depriving communities of a powerful tool for ensuring compliance and accessing real-time pollution data. Those numbers represent more than policy data. They represent people in the neighborhoods around sterilizer facilities in Atlanta and Los Angeles, around coal plants in Kentucky and West Virginia, around chemical plants in Louisiana’s Cancer Alley, who were never consulted, never notified, and never given a chance to respond to an email that changed the air they breathe. If you live near an industrial facility, check your local air quality index regularly, ask your local representatives what protections remain in place, and follow the federal court cases working their way through the system. The law, and the people who live beside these plants, deserve better than an inbox.
AI Disclaimer: This article was created with the assistance of AI tools and reviewed by a human editor.
Read More: 6 Ways To Remove Indoor Air Pollution (Step-by-step)