Report on U.S. Regulatory Changes and Their Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

1.0 Executive Summary

A series of presidential proclamations has granted “regulatory relief” to over 100 industrial facilities in the United States, allowing them to bypass environmental rules established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). These actions, justified on the grounds of national security, directly conflict with multiple United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those concerning health, clean water, clean energy, and sustainable communities.

2.0 Details of Regulatory Exemptions

The proclamations provide exemptions from EPA regulations for facilities across several key sectors. The stated purpose is to promote American security, but the functional outcome is non-compliance with established environmental standards.

• Energy: Exemptions apply to coal-fired power plants.
• Chemical Manufacturing: Facilities manufacturing chemicals are granted relief.
• Iron Ore Processing: Taconite iron processing plants are included.
• Medical Equipment: Ethylene oxide commercial sterilizers are exempted.

3.0 Conflict with SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

The regulatory relief measures pose a direct threat to public health, undermining the core targets of SDG 3. Critics, including health and environmental advocates, warn that the policy will lead to increased air pollution from toxic chemicals.

1. Increased Health Risks: Experts from organizations like Earthjustice project a rise in serious health conditions for communities located near the affected facilities.
2. Specific Health Concerns:
   • Higher incidence of cancer
   • Increased rates of birth defects
   • Aggravation and new cases of childhood asthma
3. Prioritizing Polluters: The policy is characterized by critics as prioritizing corporate profit over the well-being of citizens, directly contravening the goal of ensuring healthy lives for all.

4.0 Setbacks for Environmental and Climate Goals

The executive actions create significant setbacks for several environmental SDGs by sanctioning activities that degrade natural resources and contribute to climate change.

• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation: In a related action, the EPA has granted a one-year delay for utility companies to inspect and report on contamination from toxic coal ash landfills. This delay increases the risk of hazardous contaminants leaching into groundwater, threatening the safety of water resources.
• SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy: By exempting coal-fired power plants from pollution limits, the administration is actively hindering the transition to clean energy. This props up a polluting energy source, contrary to the objectives of SDG 7.
• SDG 13: Climate Action: Supporting the continued, less-regulated operation of coal plants directly opposes global efforts to combat climate change.

5.0 Undermining Sustainable Communities and Production

The proclamations challenge the principles of sustainable urban development and responsible industrial practices.

• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities: The policy disproportionately endangers communities situated “downwind” of the exempted industrial plants, exposing them to higher levels of toxic air pollution and undermining the goal of creating safe and resilient human settlements.
• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production: Granting exemptions from pollution controls encourages unsustainable production patterns. It allows industries to externalize the environmental and health costs of their operations, a practice that SDG 12 aims to eliminate.

6.0 Institutional Integrity and Governance Concerns

The process and justification for the regulatory relief raise questions about governance and institutional accountability, which are central to SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions.

1. Misuse of Justification: Critics from the Natural Resources Defense Council argue that claims of “national security” and “lack of available technology” are pretexts used to benefit corporate polluters.
2. Erosion of Regulatory Power: The actions represent a deliberate weakening of the EPA’s mandate to protect public health and the environment. Previous actions included the EPA administrator inviting corporations to directly request exemptions from clean air standards.
3. Lack of Transparency: The process of granting exemptions based on corporate requests rather than scientific or public interest criteria undermines the principles of just and accountable institutions.

Analysis of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

   • Target 3.9: By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination.
     
     Explanation: The article directly connects the regulatory rollbacks to negative health outcomes. It warns that the actions “will cause more cancer, more birth defects, and more children to suffer [from] asthma” due to “toxic chemicals in the air you breathe.” This aligns with the goal of reducing illnesses caused by air and chemical pollution.

2. SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

   • Target 6.3: By 2030, improve water quality by reducing pollution, eliminating dumping and minimizing release of hazardous chemicals and materials.
     
     Explanation: The article discusses the delay for utility companies to “inspect and report on contamination from toxic coal ash landfills.” An expert notes this means “one more year of hazardous contaminants getting into the groundwater,” which directly relates to reducing water pollution from hazardous materials.

3. SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

   • Target 11.6: By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, including by paying special attention to air quality and municipal and other waste management.
     
     Explanation: The article highlights the impact on communities located near industrial facilities, stating, “If your family lives downwind of these plants, this is going to mean more toxic chemicals in the air you breathe.” This focuses on the degradation of air quality within human settlements, a key aspect of Target 11.6.

4. SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

   • Target 12.4: By 2020, achieve the environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes throughout their life cycle… and significantly reduce their release to air, water and soil in order to minimize their adverse impacts on human health and the environment.
     
     Explanation: The core issue of the article is the government granting “regulatory relief” that allows industries to avoid compliance with rules for managing pollutants. This directly undermines the environmentally sound management of chemicals and wastes, as it permits polluters to “just dump their toxic chemicals in our air” and leads to the release of “toxic coal ash” into the groundwater.

5. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.
     
     Explanation: The article critiques the governmental process, describing the proclamations as a way for polluters to get a “free pass” and “illegally delaying clean air laws.” It mentions the EPA administrator inviting corporations to request exemptions, suggesting a lack of accountability and transparency in institutional processes, prioritizing corporate interests over public health and environmental law.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. Target 3.9 & 11.6

   • Implied Indicator: Concentration of toxic chemicals in the air.
     
     Explanation: The article repeatedly mentions “more toxic chemicals in the air you breathe.” Measuring the levels of these specific chemicals (like ethylene oxide and pollutants from coal plants) in the air, especially in communities “downwind of these plants,” would be a direct indicator of the impact on air quality and public health risk.
   • Implied Indicator: Incidence rates of pollution-related diseases.
     
     Explanation: The article warns of “more cancer, more birth defects, and more children to suffer [from] asthma.” Tracking the rates of these specific health conditions in affected communities would serve as an indicator of the health consequences of the policy changes.

2. Target 6.3

   • Implied Indicator: Level of hazardous contaminants in groundwater.
     
     Explanation: The article explicitly states that delaying inspections of coal ash landfills means “one more year of hazardous contaminants getting into the groundwater.” Measuring the concentration of these contaminants in groundwater near these sites is a clear indicator of water quality degradation.

3. Target 12.4

   • Implied Indicator: Volume of toxic chemicals and waste released into the air, water, and soil.
     
     Explanation: The article is about allowing facilities to not comply with pollution limits. An indicator would be the total amount of pollutants (e.g., ethylene oxide, mercury from coal, toxic coal ash) released by the exempted facilities, which would otherwise have been controlled.

4. Target 16.6

   • Implied Indicator: Number of regulatory exemptions granted to corporations.
     
     Explanation: The article specifies that “over 100 facilities” and “68 coal-fired power plants” were granted exemptions. The number of such exemptions from established environmental laws serves as an indicator of institutional accountability and transparency being undermined.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: commondreams.org