Text: EPA has considered numerous regulatory alternatives to the final provisions of the rule, which are discussed in the Summary and Analysis of Comments, but has determined that the requirements expressed in the final rule constitute the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative that would meet the mandate of section 213(a)(3) of the Clean Air Act.
Entailment: EPA has thought about alternatives to the rule.
Contradiction: EPA went with an alternative plan instead of what they originally wanted.