Health and Green Groups Tell EPA: Don’t Let Data Centers and other Major Polluters Build Before Getting Permits

Health and Green Groups Tell EPA: Don't Let Data Centers and other Major Polluters Build Before Getting Permits

EPA's proposal would let major polluters build before first acquiring the proper permits

Contacts

Tylar Greene, [email protected]

A coalition of health and environmental organizations submitted comments - in addition to tens of thousands of individual public comments - urging the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to withdraw its proposed rule, "Begin Actual Construction in the New Source Review (NSR) Preconstruction Permitting Program." The proposal would allow data centers, power plants and other industrial polluters to complete major construction on new facilities before obtaining the air permits required under the Clean Air Act and intended to protect public health, air quality and local communities.

"Our children shouldn't have to breathe the consequences of illegal construction," said David Baron, senior attorney at Earthjustice. "Dirty air from massive new data centers and industrial facilities threatens the most vulnerable, including the elderly and those with respiratory issues like asthma. Allowing construction of these places without first requiring a clean air permit is illegal, reckless and puts public health in danger."

If finalized, the rule would reverse nearly 50 years of Clean Air Act law and practice, cut the public out of opportunities to weigh in before significant portions of a polluting facility is built, and accelerate the siting of data centers and other major industrial facilities in communities that could be harmed by increases in air pollution.

"Trump's EPA wants to let project developers build first and ask permission later," said John Walke, NRDC's Federal Clean Air Director. "That's exactly backwards. Data centers, power plants and other major polluters could break ground before anyone determines what their pollution would mean for families living nearby. By the time the health risks are clear, the project could be nearly built, hundreds of millions of dollars already spent, and stopping it would be far harder."

EPA's proposal from May 13, 2026 would redefine "begin actual construction" to exclude work on components that don't themselves emit pollutants - utility infrastructure, concrete pads, and entire buildings - even when that construction is essential to a major polluting facility. In practice, that means a company could pour foundations, construct buildings, and sink hundreds of millions of dollars into a massive data center or other project before any air pollution permit is issued, and in many cases before the public ever gets a meaningful chance to weigh in.

"This proposal would shut communities out of decisions about major new polluting facilities until construction is nearly complete, making it nearly impossible to advocate for any meaningful changes or for the facility to be located someplace more suitable until it's too late," said Keri Powell, Senior Attorney and Leader of SELC's Air Program. "People deserve a real voice before these projects move forward, especially when they're at risk of worsening air pollution in communities that are already overburdened or threatening clean air where it still exists."

"Meaningful economic progress must include clean air, safe communities, and healthier people," said Surbhi Sarang, Senior Attorney for Environmental Defense Fund. "The Clean Air Act requires that air quality and health be reviewed before industrial facilities, or expansions of those facilities, are approved. It doesn't make sense for industry or for communities to allow construction before there is a robust plan in place to protect the clean air we all rely on."

"EPA's unlawful proposal would put public health and the environment at risk by weakening the Clean Air Act's longstanding requirement that permits be secured before construction begins," said Jeffrey Hammons, attorney at Clean Air Task Force. "By allowing projects to move forward before regulators and communities can fully assess their impacts, the proposal would limit public input, pressure agencies to approve projects that are already largely built, and undermine safeguards designed to prevent harmful pollution before it occurs."

The coalition's comments argue that EPA's proposal is not just bad policy but unlawful, contradicting the text and purpose of the Clean Air Act and reversing decades of consistent agency practice without the reasoned justification required by law.

Additional Resources

• About the Washington, D.C. Office

About Earthjustice

Earthjustice is the premier nonprofit environmental law organization. We wield the power of law and the strength of partnership to protect people's health, to preserve magnificent places and wildlife, to advance clean energy, and to combat climate change. We are here because the earth needs a good lawyer.