U.S. Chamber Urges Supreme Court Review of EPA’s Air Rule That’s Restricting Critical Infrastructure Investment

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and several leading business organizations, as well as 25 states, today asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review a D.C. Circuit decision that upheld a Biden-era Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule tightening the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for fine particulate matter (PM2.5). The Chamber and its fellow associations are concerned about the rule's sweeping consequences for permitting, infrastructure investment, manufacturing, energy production and economic growth.

"The United States has some of the best air quality in the world, thanks to steady reductions in contributors to particulate matter emissions - by as much as 79 percent since 2010," said Chad Whiteman, Vice President of Environment and Regulatory Affairs at the Chamber's Global Energy Institute. "It is important to continue making progress, but the regulation would restrict or even stop investments in manufacturing and other critical infrastructure and exacerbate permitting challenges that are already limiting the ability of businesses to respond to changing market conditions and growing consumer demands."

The vast majority (over 84 percent) of particulate matter emissions now come from non-point sources such as wildfires, construction and road dust - factors that are extremely difficult for individual regions and states to control. By contrast, only 16 percent come from industrial sources and power plants, with further improvements likely as new plants and emerging technologies come online.

As the petition explains, the D.C. Circuit's decision presents questions of exceptional importance that necessitate Supreme Court review. First, EPA may not revise national air-quality standards outside the Clean Air Act's normal five-year review cycle without first completing a thorough scientific review, as Congress required. Second, EPA must consider the costs and consequences of exercising its authority before deciding to impose a new standard outside the normal review cycle.

"Congress established a clear process and EPA did not follow it," said Daryl Joseffer, President of the U.S. Chamber Litigation Center. "The agency bypassed important scientific review requirements and failed to account for the consequences of exercising its discretionary authority. The D.C. Circuit's decision empowers administrations of both parties to upend regulatory regimes in all fifty States without fully understanding the science or considering costs. The Supreme Court should hear this exceptionally important case and reaffirm the limits that Congress placed on EPA's power."

The case stems from EPA's 2024 Biden-era Rule that relied on an abbreviated process to lower the annual standard for fine particulate matter, commonly known as PM2.5. The new standard triggers new federal and state regulatory obligations, makes permitting more onerous, and imposes compliance burdens on communities and businesses across the country.