精品麻豆

The Arizona 精品麻豆 of Commerce & Industry has joined a coalition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review a federal air-quality rule that business groups say could make it more difficult to permit new manufacturing, energy and infrastructure projects. 

The petition, filed Friday, challenges a 2024 Environmental Protection Agency (鈥淓PA鈥�) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (鈥淣AAQS鈥�) revision that tightened the national standard for fine particulate matter, commonly known as PM2.5. The revision lowered the annual standard from 12 micrograms per cubic meter to 9, a 25% reduction.    

PM2.5 refers to microscopic particles in the air that are small enough to be inhaled deep into the lungs. Under the Clean Air Act, communities that do not meet federal air-quality standards can face additional regulatory requirements, while businesses seeking to build or expand major facilities can face more stringent permitting requirements. 

For businesses, the practical effect is in permitting. The new standard can tighten pre-construction permitting even in areas that met the previous standard, requiring companies to demonstrate that a new or expanded facility will not push air pollution above the federal limit. In areas deemed out of compliance, or 鈥渘onattainment,鈥� new projects can face even stricter emissions requirements. 

鈥淎rizona can protect clean air and continue to grow, but we have to be realistic about what these rules mean on the ground,鈥� Arizona 精品麻豆 President and CEO Danny Seiden said. 鈥淲hen a federal standard makes it harder to permit a new manufacturing plant, energy project or piece of critical infrastructure, that has consequences for investment, jobs and our ability to compete. Businesses need tough rules to also be clear, lawful and workable.鈥� 

The case centers on the process EPA used to adopt the stricter standard. 

The Clean Air Act directs EPA to conduct a 鈥渢horough review鈥� of national ambient air-quality standards every five years. The business coalition argues that when the Biden administration’s EPA revised the NAAQS outside that normal cycle, EPA did not complete the same comprehensive scientific review required for a regular five-year revision. The petition says it was the first time EPA had revised a national air-quality standard without completing such a review. In doing so, the EPA also failed to consider the costs of undertaking a discretionary off-cycle review. 聽

鈥淭he issue here is whether EPA can make a major change to an air-quality standard without going through the full review Congress required,鈥� said Vanessa Pomeroy, deputy general counsel and chief counsel of the Arizona 精品麻豆 Legal Center. 鈥淥ur position is that it can鈥檛. When a rule can affect permitting, investment and major projects across the country, the process matters.鈥� 

The case has taken an unusual turn since the rule was adopted. 

After initially defending the 2024 rule, the current EPA reversed its position and asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to vacate the rule, agreeing that the prior administration had not followed the required process and had failed to properly consider costs associated with initiating an off-cycle review. The D.C. Circuit rejected both the business groups鈥� challenge and EPA鈥檚 request and left the rule in place in June.聽

The Arizona 精品麻豆, U.S. 精品麻豆 of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers and other industry groups are now asking the Supreme Court to review that decision. Arizona legislative leaders are also among the petitioners. 

The permitting challenge is compounded by the fact that much of the particulate matter in the air comes from sources businesses cannot directly control. More than 84% comes from non-point sources such as wildfires, construction and road dust, while industrial sources and power plants account for about 16%. 

For Arizona, the case could help determine how easily federal air-quality standards can be tightened outside the normal review cycle and what that means for permitting, investment and major projects.