
Why Ohio businesses should continue environmental compliance efforts amid federal shifts
Significant restructuring of federal agencies aimed at reducing spending appears to also be driven by a more refined policy of pro-industry deregulation. However, it is not clear if (or when) these actions will lead to noticeable changes impacting a business' day-to-day operations.
Should businesses respond to recent changes and assess significant reductions to their compliance programs? At least for environmental compliance, it is probably best to continue with the status quo.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), like most federal agencies, has undergone sweeping changes. This includes significant staff cuts and reorganizations, threatened and realized budget cuts, the elimination of programs and a change in enforcement priorities and rulemaking focuses. These changes may make it seem tempting for companies to ease up on their environmental compliance efforts. However, there are several compelling reasons why businesses should not abandon their environmental compliance programs, even in the face of a shifting U.S. EPA landscape.
The Vorys Energy & Environmental Law Blog helps keep readers informed about what is going on in both the energy and environmental fields. You can expect to find news and breaking legal developments on the latest environmental issues. Learn more and subscribe here.
The EPA's role is not disappearing
Unlike the Department of Education, where President Trump has consistently stated a desire to fully eliminate the department, there does not appear to be any intention to eliminate EPA. The matter of fact is that everyone realizes the importance of environmental protection, lest we return to the days of a burning Cuyahoga River. While there are disagreements on the extent of EPA's role, it is important to understand that the EPA is not vanishing. Nor are the substantial federal statutes regulating the environment such as the Clean Air Act (CAA), Clean Water Act (CWA), and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).
Even if U.S. EPA enforcement softens, federal environmental statutes contain citizen suit provisions that allow for private parties (including environmental groups) to 'step in the shoes' of the U.S. EPA and bring lawsuits against businesses to comply with environmental laws. These citizen suits are often much more costly than government enforcement and can seek significant more burdensome corrective actions and you may be obligated to pay the private parties' attorney fees if they are successful.
State-level enforcement is independent and remains strong
It is also critical to recognize that while the U.S. EPA's focus may be changing, state environmental agencies do not have to follow suit. Federal environmental laws have a unique structure and relationship with state environmental laws. Generally, federal legislation sets the bar for environmental rules. EPA is tasked with writing regulations and enforcing the statutes – but they also commonly authorize states to implement their own environmental programs. State programs must be as strict as the federal programs but also can be more restrictive. Most states have taken EPA up on the offer and currently oversee their own state versions of the CAA, CWA, RCRA and others. This is the case in Ohio where the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA) is the primary regulatory and enforcement authority for environmental compliance.
Ohio EPA has a long history of operating a robust regulatory program in the state. It was first authorized to issue National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) water permits under the CWA in 1974, regulate the base hazardous waste program under RCRA in 1989, and issue major Title V air permits under the CAA in 1994. It currently has an active and robust compliance and enforcement program that is generally not affected by federal changes. Ohio has yet to signal major agency shakeups like those happening at the federal level. Thus, businesses in Ohio will still face inspections, penalties, and potential lawsuits from Ohio EPA even if federal enforcement becomes more relaxed.
Ohio EPA is also more connected to local environmental issues and has a deeper interest in protecting local communities and ecosystems. Relying solely on reduced federal enforcement will leave businesses exposed to state-level enforcement.
Long-term considerations
Corporate environmental responsibility is not just about avoiding fines or regulatory penalties; it is also about maintaining a strong reputation. Maintaining a strong compliance program can position companies as leaders in sustainability, which can translate into new business opportunities, improved relationships with regulators, and greater customer loyalty.
Putting aside considerations of consumers and investors, abandoning or reducing environmental compliance programs will harm a company's image vis-à-vis Ohio EPA and U.S. EPA in the future. We know policies are cyclical and today's federal changes, even if they drip down to the state level, likely won't be around forever. It is important to maintain relationships with regulators whose tenure outlasts these policy shifts. In addition, the costs saved in the near term must be compared to the future costs (including operational impacts) of re-implementing compliance programs when the need arises in the future.
Conclusion
While the federal administration change and changes within the U.S. EPA may create uncertainty, businesses should not abandon their environmental compliance programs. U.S. EPA's core regulatory functions remain in place, state agencies like Ohio EPA continue to be the frontline of compliance, and environmental laws are still enforceable by citizens and environmental groups.
Investing in robust compliance programs not only helps mitigate legal risks but also ensures long-term sustainability, protects a company's reputation, and positions it to navigate future regulatory changes effectively. Abandoning environmental compliance efforts now could result in costly setbacks, future legal consequences, and reputational damage. Maintaining strong environmental practices is almost always the better long-term choice for any business.
Vorys was established in 1909 and currently has nearly 375 attorneys in 10 offices in Ohio, Washington, D.C., Texas, Pennsylvania, California, London and Berlin. Vorys currently ranks as one of the 200 largest law firms in the United States according to American Lawyer magazine. Learn more.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Virginia Giuffre's family expresses shock over Trump saying Epstein 'stole' her
The family of Virginia Giuffre, who was among Jeffrey Epstein's most well-known sex trafficking accusers, said that it was shocking to hear President Donald Trump say the disgraced financier 'stole' Giuffre from him and urged that Epstein's former girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell remain in prison. Giuffre, who had accused Britain's Prince Andrew and other influential men of sexually exploiting her as a teenager trafficked by Epstein, has been a central figure in conspiracy theories tied to the case. She died by suicide this year. Her family's statement is the latest development involving Epstein, who took his own life in a New York jail in 2019 while facing federal sex trafficking charges, and the Republican president, who was his one-time friend. Trump denied prior knowledge of Epstein's crimes and said he cut off their relationship years ago, but he still faces questions about the case. Trump, responding to a reporter's question on Tuesday, said that he got upset with Epstein over his poaching of workers and that Epstein had stolen Giuffre from his Palm Beach, Florida, club. 'It was shocking to hear President Trump invoke our sister and say that he was aware that Virginia had been 'stolen' from Mar-a-Lago,' the family's statement said. 'We and the public are asking for answers; survivors deserve this,' it continued. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt noted the president was responding to a reporter's question and didn't bring up Giuffre himself. 'The fact remains that President Trump kicked Jeffrey Epstein out of his club for being a creep to his female employees,' she said. The family's statement comes shortly after the Justice Department interviewed Maxwell, who was convicted in 2021 on sex trafficking and other charges and is serving a 20-year sentence in Tallahassee, Florida. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche interviewed Maxwell in a Florida courthouse, though details about what she said haven't become public. Maxwell's lawyers have said she testified truthfully and answered questions 'about 100 different people." They have said she's willing to answer more questions from Congress if she is granted immunity from future prosecution for her testimony and if lawmakers agree to satisfy other conditions. A message seeking comment about the Giuffre family's statement was sent to Maxwell's attorney Thursday. A Trump administration official said the president is not considering clemency action for Maxwell. Giuffre said she was approached by Maxwell in 2000 and eventually was hired by her as a masseuse for Epstein. But the couple effectively made her a sexual servant, she said, pressuring her into gratifying not only Epstein but his friends and associates. Giuffre said she was flown around the world for appointments with men including Prince Andrew while she was 17 and 18 years old. The men, including Andrew, denied it and assailed Giuffre's credibility. She acknowledged changing some key details of her account. The prince settled with Giuffre in 2022 for an undisclosed sum, agreeing to make a 'substantial donation' to her survivors' organization. The American-born Giuffre lived in Australia for years and became an advocate for sex trafficking survivors after emerging as a central figure in Epstein's prolonged downfall. Her family's statement said she endured death threats and financial ruin over her cooperation with authorities against Epstein and Maxwell.
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump administration cancels plans to develop new offshore wind projects
The Trump administration is canceling plans to use large areas of federal waters for new offshore wind development, the latest step to suppress the industry in the United States. More than 3.5 million acres had been designated wind energy areas, the offshore locations deemed most suitable for wind energy development. The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management is now rescinding all designated wind energy areas in federal waters, announcing on Wednesday an end to setting aside large areas for 'speculative wind development." Offshore wind lease sales were anticipated off the coasts of Texas, Louisiana, Maine, New York, California and Oregon, as well as in the central Atlantic. The Biden administration last year had announced a five-year schedule to lease federal offshore tracts for wind energy production. Trump began reversing the country's energy policies after taking office in January. A series of executive orders took aim at increasing oil, gas and coal production. The Republican president has been hostile to renewable energy, particularly offshore wind. One early executive order temporarily halted offshore wind lease sales in federal waters and paused the issuance of approvals, permits and loans for all wind projects. In trying to make a case against wind energy, he has relied on false and misleading claims about the use of wind power in the U.S. and around the world. The bureau said it was acting in accordance with Trump's action and an order by his interior secretary this week to end any preferential treatment toward wind and solar facilities, which were described as unreliable, foreign-controlled energy sources. Robin Shaffer, president of Protect Our Coast New Jersey, applauded the administration for its actions and said they were long overdue. Opponents of offshore wind projects are particularly vocal and well-organized in New Jersey. 'It's hard to believe these projects ever got this far because of the immensity, scale, scope and expense, compared to relatively cheap and reliable forms of onshore power,' he said Thursday. 'We're nearly there, but we haven't reached the finish line yet.' Attorneys general from 17 states and the District of Columbia are suing in federal court to challenge Trump's executive order halting leasing and permitting for wind energy projects. His administration had also halted work on a major offshore wind project for New York, but allowed it to resume in May. The nation's first commercial-scale offshore wind farm, a 12-turbine wind farm called South Fork, opened last year east of Montauk Point, New York. ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at Jennifer Mcdermott, The Associated Press
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Lula's approval rises amid tariff dispute with Trump, poll shows
By Isabel Teles SAO PAULO (Reuters) -Approval for Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva exceeded disapproval for the first time in nine months, a poll showed on Thursday, against a backdrop of a growing dispute with Washington. Earlier in July, U.S. President Donald Trump said he would slap 50% tariffs on Brazilian exports to fight what he has called a "witch hunt" against Lula's right-wing rival, former President Jair Bolsonaro. Those tariffs were formalized on Thursday, albeit with some key sector exemptions. The Trump administration has also imposed sanctions and visa restrictions on the judge overseeing Bolsonaro's trial on charges of plotting a coup. Lula's government has pushed back, calling Trump an unwanted "emperor" and the sanctions "unacceptable." The AtlasIntel/Bloomberg poll showed 50.2% approval of Lula's performance, up from 49.7% in the previous poll two weeks ago and marking the first time he has scored greater approval than disapproval since October. The new poll adds to evidence that Trump's tactics may be backfiring in Brazil, rallying public support behind a defiant leftist government. The proportion of respondents who consider Lula's government good or great has also improved, now at 46.6% from 43.4%, although that is still below the 48.2% who consider it bad or awful. If a replay of the 2022 presidential election in Brazil was held this week, 47.8% of those surveyed would vote for Lula and 44.2% for Bolsonaro. Despite being barred from holding public office until 2030, Bolsonaro insists he could run again, while Lula has hinted that he could run for reelection. The poll surveyed 7,334 Brazilian adults online between July 25 and July 28. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus one percentage point.