| EPA PUSHED BACK ON EFFICIENCY ROLLBACK RATIONALE: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) staff challenged the Trump administration's conclusion that rolling back vehicle fuel efficiency rules would save lives. In an official report that the EPA sent in June to the White House Office of Management and Budget, staffers said the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA) modeling overinflated the safety drawbacks from increasingly efficient cars. In the end, the two agencies came out with a proposal earlier this year to freeze efficiency and green gas emissions standards in 2021 and cancel out plans to ratchet them up through 2026. In their unified rule dubbed the "Safer and Affordable Fuel Efficient Vehicles Rule," the agencies said the rollback would save 1,000 lives per year and save consumers thousands of dollars on new vehicles. But documents released Tuesday show that there was significant disagreement over those conclusions. EPA's modeling resulted in "safety outcomes that show the proposed standards are detrimental to safety," including an additional 17 traffic deaths per year between 2036 and 2045, the report said. The EPA also found technology costs $500 lower for the more efficient cars than NHTSA, and a consumer payback period about two-thirds shorter. The agency also accused NHTSA of inflating the number of old, less safe cars that would stay on the road if newer cars had to be more efficient. The EPA said the records show just a small snapshot of the administration's back-and-forth in formulating the rule. "These emails are but a fraction of the robust dialogue that occurred during interagency deliberations for the proposed rule. EPA is currently soliciting comments on eight different alternative standards and we look forward to reviewing any new data and information," said EPA spokesman James Hewitt. Read more. Why it matters: The Trump administration's argument that its rollback would improve safety was already being challenged in multiple corners. Opponents of the Trump proposal immediately cited the documents Tuesday to argue that the safety analysis was flawed. "This shows that even the EPA had deep reservations about the bogus safety arguments being pushed by the Department of Transportation. We know that automakers can make cars both more fuel efficient and safer; it's heartening to find out EPA's technical experts agree," said Irene Gutierrez, a clean energy attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council. What's next: The agencies are due to publish their proposal in the Federal Register soon, which will kick off a 60-day public comment period. Happy Tuesday! Welcome to Overnight Energy, The Hill's roundup of the latest energy and environment news. Please send tips and comments to Timothy Cama, tcama@thehill.com, and Miranda Green, mgreen@thehill.com. Follow us on Twitter: @Timothy_Cama, @mirandacgreen, @thehill. ZINKE BLAMES ENVIRONMENTALISTS FOR SCALE OF WILDFIRES: Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke blamed "environmental terrorist" groups for the deadly forest fires ripping through California. Zinke, who visited neighborhoods ravaged by the state's largest wildfire ever over the weekend and on Monday, said environmentalists and green regulations in California made the fires much worse. "We have been held hostage by these environmental terrorist groups that have not allowed public access -- that have refused to allow [the] harvest of timber," Zinke told Brietbart radio over the weekend. During his visit to the Golden State, Zinke pushed a narrative that increasing logging industry access to national forests could limit fire intensity. "But we have these radical environmentalists that close off roads, refuse to have firebreaks, refuse to have any timber harvested, no grazing, and the result is these catastrophic fires," Zinke said. Zinke's message echoes President Trump, who last weekend tweeted that California's environment laws were to blame for the state's fire disaster. Read more here. ]ILLINOIS SUES TRUMP CHICAGO PROPERTY OVER RIVER PROTECTION VIOLATION: Illinois attorney general is suing a Chicago property owned by President Trump's company, alleging that it is violating environmental laws meant to protect the Chicago River. The Trump International Hotel and Tower takes in nearly 20 million gallons of water daily from the river for cooling various systems and puts it back at a higher temperature. Federal law requires the building to submit certain data about its water intake procedures to Illinois environmental regulators to help determine if it is causing too much harm to fish and aquatic life, submissions that Madigan says the property has not done. Madigan also alleged in a Cook County court that the Trump Tower's permit to use the water under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System expired nearly a year ago. "Trump Tower continues to take millions of gallons of water from the Chicago River every day without a permit and without any regard to how it may be impacting the river's ecosystem," Madigan said in a Tuesday statement. "I filed my lawsuit to make sure Trump Tower cannot continue violating the law." The Trump Chicago property is owned by the Trump Organization, the real estate firm owned by Trump through a revocable trust. The Trump Organization accused Madigan of filing the lawsuits for political reasons. Read more here. Flashback: In June, two environmental groups filed an intent to sue the Trump property in Chicago for the same environmental rule breach. Read about it here. OUTSIDE THE BELTWAY: Michigan health officials to begin testing blood of residents exposed to cancer causing chemical Diamondback Energy to buy Energen in $9.2 billion deal that will nearly double the oil producer North Dakota wins attorney fees over Michigan Energy lawsuit IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: Check out Tuesday's stories ... -EPA challenged Trump officials' claim car efficiency rollback would save lives -Illinois sues Trump Chicago property for allegedly violating river protection rules -Zinke blames 'environmental terrorist groups' for scale of California wildfires -Al Gore: Trump has had 'less of an impact on environment so far than I feared' | 
