by Ethan Faverino | Apr 1, 2026 | Economy, News
By Ethan Faverino |
Arizona House Majority Whip Julie Wiloughby (R-LD13) praised a recent Trump administration decision recognizing the significant impact of internal emissions on Arizona’s ability to meet federal air quality standards.
The ruling grants the Phoenix metropolitan area relief from stricter federal requirements, opening the door for potential long-term reforms to the state’s expensive summer gasoline blend mandated in Maricopa and Pinal Counties.
The decision, issued last week by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), found that the Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area would have met the 2015 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) if not for emissions originating outside the United States. This finding, under Section 179B of the Clean Air Act, prevents reclassification to a more severe status. It acknowledges that a major share of emissions affecting Arizona is beyond the state’s control.
For months, Willoughby has collaborated with local and federal officials to pursue reforms addressing Arizona’s higher summer fuel costs. In January, she sent a letter to the EPA initiating discussions on permanent changes to lower costs for families while maintaining compliance with air quality standards.
“The main reason drivers in Maricopa and Pinal counties pay more for gas in the summer is that these areas are forced to use a special boutique blend made only for Arizona,” explained Willoughby. “It costs more to produce, limits supply, and leaves our state more vulnerable to price spikes. The question is whether this requirement is still doing anything meaningful to improve air quality. If it is not, then Arizona families are being forced to pay more for little to no benefit.”
Willoughby noted that industry operations are cleaner and national fuel standards have evolved since Arizona’s blend was last updated. “Industry is cleaner today than it was when Arizona’s blend was last updated, and fuel standards nationwide have changed significantly since then. There is a strong possibility that Arizona can move to a lower-cost fuel option without sacrificing air quality. If the evidence supports that conclusion, we should act immediately.”
To advance the issue, Willoughby introduced a package of five measures aimed at lowering fuel costs, evaluating compliant fuel options, and requiring the state to adopt a lower-cost fuel once federally approved.
“In order to change the blend, Arizona must submit a request to the EPA to revise our State Implementation Plan and show that we can still meet federal air quality standards with the new blend,” added Willoughby. “The modeling used to make that demonstration must take into account the fact that a major share of the emissions affecting our state comes from outside our borders and is beyond Arizona’s control. The Trump Administration’s recent decision recognizing international transport acknowledges this impact and gives Arizona more room to reevaluate whether our current fuel requirements are still justified. With the federal government signaling openness, this may be our best and only opportunity to get this done.”
In February, Willoughby requested that the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) model the impacts of switching from Arizona’s current boutique gasoline blend (Reid Vapor Pressure of 7.0 psi) to a more widely available, lower-cost blend with an RVP of 7.4 psi.
Preliminary modeling completed in March showed that the switch would increase the maximum ozone concentration in the Phoenix metropolitan area by between zero and 0.01 parts per billion.
“That is a negligible impact and more than enough reason to move this conversation forward,” continued Willoughby. “Just as important, Governor Hobbs’ administration already has these results. MAG provided the modeling to her Department of Environmental Quality, which means the Governor could begin acting on this now if she wanted to. She does not need to wait. She does not need more excuses. If Governor Hobbs is serious about lowering fuel costs, she should direct her agency to act immediately.”
In a follow-up letter to MAG Director of Environmental Planning, Matt Poppen, Willoughby highlighted the positive results from the Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extensions (CAMx v7.32) and Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ v5.5) analyses. The CAMx results showed no changes in the 2023 design value attainment at any monitoring site, while CMAQ predicted a maximum impact of just 0.01 ppb at three sites.
Willoughby also requested additional modeling for a Federal Reformed Gasoline blend with an RVP of 7.8 psi, used in some other western states, and discussions on next steps for a State Implementation Plan revision.
“The modeling is favorable. The facts are lining up in Arizona’s favor. We should seize this opportunity and make the case for lasting gas affordability now,” concluded Willoughby.
Ethan Faverino is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Mar 31, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
Arizona will be fighting the Trump administration over its deregulation of motor vehicle and engine emissions.
Attorney General Kris Mayes announced her decision to sue the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) alongside a coalition of states, counties, and cities over the agency’s decision last month to rescind the 2009 Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding.
The 2009 Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding followed the Supreme Court ruling Massachusetts v. EPA in 2007 granting the EPA authorization to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. The 2009 Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding resulted in emissions regulations for new motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines.
Mayes and the EPA disagree as to whether the Supreme Court’s 2007 ruling and the 2009 Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding were connected. Mayes maintains the decision directly gave the EPA regulatory authority, but the EPA maintains the decision merely recognized greenhouse gas emissions as air pollutants.
The EPA justified its decision based on its reading of the Clean Air Act (CAA), first established in 1965, and Supreme Court decisions overruling EPA regulations following the 2007 decision.
The EPA determined it lacked statutory authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions for motor vehicles, specifically citing Section 202(a) of the CAA. Additionally, the EPA determined that its regulations “have not and cannot have any material impact on global climate change concerns, rendering them futile.”
According to the EPA, the 2009 Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding served as the legal prerequisite for the Biden administration’s push toward an electric vehicle mandate and the vehicle manufacturer industry shift toward start-stop features in cars.
As a result of the EPA’s new rule, engine and vehicle manufactures won’t be obligated to measure, control, or report greenhouse gas emissions for any highway engine and vehicle. Their action grandfathered in model years manufactured prior to the rule.
The EPA estimated the rescission amounted to “the largest deregulatory action in U.S. history,” and would save Americans over $1.3 trillion in vehicle costs. That amounts to an estimated $2,400 in savings for new cars and trucks.
The EPA issued a notice clarifying which regulations will be impacted by their new final rule. (A full regulatory impact analysis was made available here).
Mayes accused the Trump administration of rushing the rulemaking process and “blatantly disregarding the law and science.” Mayes blamed emissions for climate change, citing Arizona’s recent years of record summer heat and wildfires.
“On the day we file this lawsuit, much of Arizona is under an extreme heat warning due to an unprecedented early heatwave that has spiked temperatures over twenty degrees above normal,” said Mayes. “It is abundantly clear that greenhouse gas pollution has fueled climate change in our state and across the entire planet. The decision by the Trump administration to rescind the Endangerment Finding will only accelerate climate change. Putting the profits of the fossil fuel industry over the future of our planet is a failure of historic proportions and we will fight it with every tool we have.”
Mayes joined the lawsuit filed by the attorneys general for 22 states and D.C.: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Nevada, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin. Their lawsuit was also joined by the governor of Pennsylvania, eight cities across seven states, and four counties across three states.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Jonathan Eberle | Mar 19, 2025 | News
By Jonathan Eberle |
A bill asking President Trump and Congress to prevent the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from imposing sanctions on Arizona is currently making its way through the Arizona legislature.
House Concurrent Memorial (HCM) 2010, sponsored by Rep. Michael Carbone (R-LD25) urges the federal government to prevent the EPA from imposing what lawmakers call “coercive and likely unconstitutional” penalties on Arizona regarding ozone pollution standards. The resolution also calls for maintaining the existing 2015 air quality standard rather than implementing stricter regulations.
The federal Clean Air Act requires the EPA to set and periodically review air quality standards to protect public health. In 2015, the EPA lowered the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for ground-level ozone to 70 parts per billion to reduce harmful pollution linked to respiratory illnesses. However, Arizona officials argue that some areas struggle to meet the standard due to factors beyond their control, such as emissions from outside the state or even outside the country.
The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) is responsible for implementing and enforcing air quality regulations at the state level. Under federal law, state air quality plans must prevent emissions that significantly contribute to pollution in neighboring states or interfere with visibility protections.
The resolution, if passed, would formally request that:
- The President and Congress intervene to stop the EPA from penalizing Arizona for failing to meet ozone standards deemed unattainable with current technology.
- The EPA revise its regulations to allow Arizona’s air quality plan to account for cross-border emissions when determining compliance.
- The EPA maintain the 2015 ozone standard rather than implement stricter limits that the resolution claims lack sufficient scientific backing.
Additionally, the measure directs the Arizona Secretary of State to send copies of the memorial to federal officials, including the President, congressional leaders, and Arizona’s U.S. Senators and Representatives.
The measure passed the Arizona House with a 32-27-1 vote and was approved by the House Natural Resources, Energy & Water Committee in a 6-4 vote.
Supporters of the resolution argue that Arizona should not be penalized for ozone levels influenced by external sources beyond state control. If approved by the Legislature, HCM 2010 will serve as an official request for federal action but will not carry the force of law.
Jonathan Eberle is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Daniel Stefanski | Apr 6, 2023 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
As many California residents head east to Arizona in response to policies they find objectionable, Maricopa County appears to be taking a leap toward adopting some of those same policies.
The Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) recently contracted with a California-based consulting firm to “identify and evaluate new and available ozone precursor control measures that could be implemented within the nonattainment area” – which is an “eight-hour ozone boundary for the 2015 ozone standard (2015 National Ambient Air Quality Standard). According to the Final Report from the consulting firm, the area runs north to south from the Yavapai County line to Hunt Highway; and west to east from 499th Avenue to the Gila and Pinal County lines.
One of the geneses of this report stems from a little-discussed published rule from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in fall 2022, which moved “the region up the severity ladder for ozone pollution, reclassifying the region from ‘marginal’ to ‘moderate’ nonattainment for the ozone pollution standard.
In a press release dated September 2022, MAG revealed that “in 2015, the EPA tightened the ozone pollution standard from 75 parts per billion to 70 parts per billion,” and that the region encompassing “Maricopa County and portions of Pinal County missed that deadline.”
MAG wrote in the September release, that “the moderate nonattainment area classification requires new actions and measures, including:
- New control measures to reduce the types of emissions that create ozone.
- Emission offset requirement for new, large facilities locating in the nonattainment area and major expansions to large, existing facilities, which are required to offset every ton of emissions by 1.15 tons.
- Contingency measures (i.e., measures to be deployed if the nonattainment area does not meet yearly emission reduction milestones).
- Potential emission controls for intrastate facilities or other emission sources located outside the Phoenix-Mesa nonattainment area.”
Enter the consultant’s Final Report this spring, which suggested “approximately 50% reduction in nonattainment area anthropogenic NOx and VOC emissions” in order to bring the region into compliance with the EPA’s standard by an August 3, 2024, deadline. An Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Division Director recently admitted that “Maricopa County businesses and residents have done a fantastic job of reducing ozone pollution by 12.5 percent since 2000.” But Maricopa County would have to exponentially and substantially pick up the pace of slashing emissions in just over one year – compared to the two-plus decades of work to cut pollution by 12.5 percent. And that is likely impossible.
But MAG is still planning to move forward with this plan, and to meet this deadline, it included suggested measures to reduce ozone in the Maricopa Nonattainment Area to meet Clean Air Act requirements related to the 2015 ozone standard. Some of the suggested measures include adopting standards similar to California like banning the internal combustion engine, banning gas appliances, and a host of regulations on various business activities.
There is a tight turnaround for approval of these drastic measures to cut emissions in Maricopa County. Before the end of April, the “MAG Regional Council may approve the Draft Suggested List of Measures” after receiving recommendations from the MAG Management Committee. Then, over this summer, “implementing entities provide commitments to implement measures, or reasoned justification for non-implementation, to MAG for inclusion in a nonattainment area state implementation plan submission to EPA.”
The EPA guidance instructs that “states should consider all available measures, including those being implemented in other areas, but must adopt measures for an area only if those measures are economically and technologically feasible and will advance the attainment date or are necessary for reasonable further progress.” According to the March 6 Draft Suggested List of Measures to Reduce Ozone in the Maricopa Nonattainment Area, “if an entity decides that a measure on the Suggested List is not available or feasible for implementation, the entity will provide a justification for why the measure is not available or feasible.”
Cities, towns, and Maricopa County may soon be forced to decide between complying with extremely onerous measures to bring down a tremendous amount of emissions in a hurry or losing out on a generous offering of federal dollars (along with financial penalties that could be levied against those jurisdictions), setting up a potential battle over federalism that will determine Maricopa County’s (and eventually Arizona’s) commitment to its libertarian and freedom-minded roots or deviation to California’s environmentalism policies and politics.
Page 1 of 11
