Manufacturing groups applauded the U.S. EPA’s plans to reconsider multiple regulations this week, particularly one they’d challenged in court that was meant to reduce particulate matter emissions from industrial facilities.
The agency’s plans to rethink a Biden administration update to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for PM 2.5 was among dozens of such announcements made on Wednesday. In a video, Administrator Lee Zeldin described the decision to rethink environmental policies as a way to reduce costs for businesses and “give power back to the states.”
National Association of Manufacturers CEO Jay Timmons said in a statement that the administration had “answered the calls of manufacturers across the country to rebalance and reconsider burdensome federal regulations harming America’s ability to compete.”
The group called out reconsideration of the NAAQS update, which it called “unworkable,” as the most prominent move by the EPA this week.
This update to Clean Air Act standards was the first since the EPA completed a review in 2012. The update, which was finalized in early 2024, brought the allowable level of fine particulate matter down from 12 micrograms per cubic meter to nine.
At the time, the Biden EPA described this as a way to improve health outcomes for people living near regulated facilities and estimated the move could prevent “4,500 premature deaths and 290,000 lost workdays.” The agency projected this could yield $22 billion to $46 billion in benefits, while coming with an estimated $590 million in costs, by 2032.
The change was soon challenged in court by dozens of Republican state attorneys general. That suit was joined by NAM, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, American Chemistry Council, American Forest & Paper Association, American Petroleum Institute, American Wood Council, National Mining Association and Portland Cement Association.
Democratic attorneys general from states such as California, along with groups such as the Sierra Club and Natural Resources Defense Council, later filed as intervenors in support of the EPA’s position. The suit is pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
In December, NAM and dozens of other trade groups sent a letter to now-President Donald Trump calling on the incoming administration to reassess a host of regulations — including this one. At the time, they noted that industrial facilities aren’t the only source of PM 2.5 and account for an estimated 15% of emissions in that category.
The group said that the EPA’s proposed level “is now so low that industry could be expected to reduce emissions below naturally occurring levels.” The group said the new level could put “large swaths of the U.S.” into nonattainment status, a term used for areas that don’t meet the NAAQS requirements. They also warned it could create “insufficient permit ‘headroom’ (even if technically in attainment) to obtain a permit.” As a result, they projected the change could affect “up to $200 billion in economic activity and almost 1 million jobs.”
The Pulp and Paperworkers’ Resource Council also called for changes to this PM 2.5 standard during a recent congressional fly-in event.
This week, AF&PA called out the EPA’s NAAQS reconsideration as one of multiple welcome developments for the industry.
“We deeply appreciate the administration recognizing that the complexity and volume of these regulations failed to balance costs and benefits, disregarded the best available science, and posed significant challenges for our industry,” CEO Heidi Brock said in a statement.
A spokesperson for the Glass Packaging Institute, which also raised concerns about the NAAQS standards in the past, said the group welcomed the review but was waiting to see further details.
Groups such as the Environmental Protection Network roundly criticized the Trump administration’s broader moves this week.
“The regulations that Lee Zeldin is targeting for destruction offer Americans a future of better health, clean energy, meaningful action on climate change, and an innovative and thriving economy,” said Joseph Goffman, former assistant administrator for the EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation, in a statement.
At least one group that is an intervenor in the lawsuit called out the proposed NAAQS change directly.
“The Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments has long advocated for strengthening of standards like the Mercury and Air Toxic Standards and the [NAAQS] for years because nurses know the significant health benefits these safeguards achieve,” Executive Director Katie Huffling said in a statement. “The multitude of proposed deregulatory actions goes against EPA’s core mission to protect human health and the environment.”
Many of the EPA’s other deregulatory proposals on Wednesday also have implications for manufacturers.
NAM and AF&PA both called out plans to reconsider National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for multiple sectors as especially notable.
This includes categories such as “integrated iron and steel manufacturing, rubber tire manufacturing, synthetic organic chemical manufacturing industry, commercial sterilizers for medical devices and spices, lime manufacturing, coke ovens, copper smelting, and taconite ore processing.”
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and a host of other trade groups such as the ACC also expressed broad support for the Trump administration’s moves.
“The chemical and plastics manufacturing industry appreciates Administrator Zeldin for recognizing that a smarter, more predictable regulatory process is imperative for not only producing more at home but making America stronger and more affordable for its citizens,” ACC CEO Chris Jahn said in a statement. “We welcome the new regulatory direction and look forward to providing input before any final actions are taken in the future."
The EPA has yet to publish a formal proposal to rethink the NAAQS or related regulations in the Federal Register. The agency’s Wednesday release said it “will soon release guidance to increase flexibility on NAAQS implementation ... and direction on permitting obligations.”
