U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 1
5 Post Office Square
Suite 100
Boston, MA 02109-3912
Electronic Filing via Regulations.gov
Re: Comments on Proposed Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Massachusetts; Regional Haze State Implementation Plan for the Second Implementation Period [EPA Docket No. EPA–R01–OAR–2023–0185]
The National Parks Conservation Association, Sierra Club, Appalachian Mountain Club, and the Coalition to Protect America’s National Parks (collectively, the Conservation Groups) submit the following comments on the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposal to approve Massachusetts’ regional haze state implementation plan (SIP) for the second planning period (SIP Revision), 89 Fed. Reg. 1482 (Jan. 10, 2024). The Conservation Groups submitted public comments to the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MDEP) on the state’s draft SIP Revision on May 14, 2021, raising many of the same issues discussed in these comments.1SIP Revision App’x 42, Nat’l Parks Conservation Ass’n & Appalachian Mtn. Club, Comments on State of Massachusetts’ Notice of Intent to Revise the State Implementation Plan for Air Quality: Regional Haze Plan for the Second Implementation Period (2018-2028) (May 14, 2021) [hereinafter “NPCA et al. Comments].
To improve air quality in our most treasured landscapes, Congress enacted the Clean Air Act’s Regional Haze program, establishing “as a national goal the prevention of any future, and the remedying of any existing, impairment of visibility in the mandatory class I Federal areas.”242 U.S.C. § 7491(a)(1). Under this program, states develop SIPs that reduce visibility impairing pollution from in-state sources and EPA determines whether those SIPs comply with the Clean Air Act and the Regional Haze Rule (RHR).3Id. § 7410(c)(1), (k)-(l). EPA cannot approve SIPs that fail to comply with the Clean Air Act.4North Dakota v. EPA, 730 F.3d 750, 760-62 (8th Cir. 2013); Oklahoma v. EPA, 723 F.3d 1201, 1207-10 (10th Cir. 2013). EPA’s actions on Regional Haze SIPs, thus, cannot be “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.”542 U.S.C. § 7607(d)(9)(A); Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass’n v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29, 43 (1983). The “arbitrary and capricious” standard that applies to EPA’s actions on SIPs under the Clean Air Act is the same as that under the Administrative Procedure Act.6Nat’l Ass’n of Clean Air Agencies v. EPA, 489 F.3d 1221, 1228 (D.C. Cir. 2007).
Click here to read the full letter.