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.
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.
Republicans in the Arizona Senate are moving on legislation they believe will reduce gas prices.
A strike everything amendment to HB 2400 proposes to mitigate price spikes at the pump by filing an emergency waiver to increase Maricopa County’s fuel supply during emergencies.
Arizona policymakers anticipate prices to spike with pending supply constraints due to a forecasted California refinery closure in April. Federal environmental regulations require Valley drivers to use a more expensive and limited specialized fuel blend year-round, a requirement that expands to affect residents elsewhere in the state during the summer months.
Should the bill be enacted, the Department of Environmental Quality and the Arizona Department of Agriculture would submit an emergency fuel waiver to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) within 30 days.
State Sen. Shawnna Bolick (R-LD2) introduced the strike everything amendment. Bolick said the state does have recourse, but it’s up to executive leadership to allow for the remedy to occur.
“We see the warning signs. Refineries are shutting down, and if we don’t act now, prices will go up. HB 2400 will make sure Arizona can quickly access additional fuel when shortages hit, instead of waiting and hoping for relief,” said Bolick in a press release.
According to Stanford University’s Woods Institute for the Environment, the California refinery shutdowns were caused by multiple factors: depleting crude oil fields, declining in-state gasoline sales, consolidating oil infrastructure, and increasing availability of imported finished fossil fuel products.
A similar issue occurred in 2023. Gov. Katie Hobbs declined to file an emergency fuel waiver with the Biden administration despite a request from petroleum refiner HF Sinclair.
The company’s senior vice president, Jerry Miller, advised Hobbs in a letter of a critical supply shortage of several counties’ Cleaner Burning Gasoline (CBG), the special gasoline formulations required in certain parts of the state by the EPA under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
These formulation requirements are laid out in Arizona’s State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP establishes different CBG requirements depending on the season. CBG is required in Maricopa County and certain parts of Pinal and Yavapai counties year-round (called “Area A”). CBG requirement expands to include more of Pinal County during the summer months of May through September (called “Area C”).
As in 2023, it will mostly be Maricopa County drivers who will feel the brunt of forecasted supply constraints.
Senate lawmakers will also consider HB 2955, which would expand the state’s fuel options by modifying the state’s fuel standards for CBG in order to expand supply options.
Sen. Bolick shared that she and other Republican lawmakers have laid the groundwork with the Trump administration to ensure that the fuel standard updates and emergency fuel waiver would be processed immediately upon filing.
“We are coordinating with the Trump Administration so Arizona is ready to act the moment these bills are signed into law,” said Bolick. “This is about getting ahead of the problem and making sure families aren’t stuck paying the price for decisions made in other states.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Maricopa County officials announced that a recent determination from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will not trigger additional air quality regulations for the region, maintaining its current “moderate” nonattainment classification under federal ozone standards.
According to Maricopa County, it remains designated as a “moderate” nonattainment area under the 2015 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), meaning ozone levels in parts of the region continue to exceed federal limits. However, the county has avoided a “serious” classification, which would increase regulatory burdens on industry.
The Clean Air Act requires areas that exceed those standards to implement measures to reduce ozone-forming pollutants such as nitrogen oxides (NOₓ) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
The EPA had been evaluating whether to reclassify the Phoenix-Mesa area since at least 2024. The agency has now issued its final determination that the region would have met federal standards if not for emissions originating outside the United States and other uncontrollable factors, allowing Maricopa County to avoid additional mandates. As a result, the county will continue operating under its current regulatory framework.
“For years, Maricopa County has taken significant steps to reduce air pollution through outreach programs and practical compliance tools for businesses. But we don’t think we should face further regulations that harm business for the types of pollution we can’t control,” Board of Supervisors Chair Kate Brophy McGee stated. “I’m pleased the EPA agrees with our position. We remain committed to pursuing programs and initiatives that improve air quality in Maricopa County.”
County officials said the decision reflects years of local mitigation efforts, including outreach programs, compliance tools for businesses, and coordination with regional and state air quality agencies.
The announcement follows a series of state and federal actions related to air quality policy that Arizona leaders have closely monitored.
Then-Congresswoman Debbie Lesko and other officials pushed back in late 2024 against a potential EPA reclassification of Maricopa County, warning that stricter standards could have economic and national security implications.
In December 2025, the EPA moved to vacate a contested Biden-era air quality rule as part of a multi-state legal challenge, signaling a shift in federal regulatory posture.
Arizona lawmakers have also raised concerns at the federal level. Earlier this year, State Sen. Frank Carroll (R-LD28) urged Congress to clarify the EPA’s authority over air quality standards, warning that regulatory uncertainty could impact economic growth in the state.
“Americans deserve clean air, land, and water, but they also deserve an economy that can grow without unnecessary federal interference,” Carroll said in a statement at the time. He added, “While the Clean Air Act allows for specific emissions regulations, the EPA must not exceed its authority or violate fundamental principles of separation of powers. By preventing bureaucratic overreach, we can protect both the environment and the economic opportunities Arizona families and businesses rely on.”
The issue has also intersected with Arizona’s economic development efforts, with Congressman Abe Hamadeh (R-AZ08) highlighting the importance of regulatory stability in May 2025 as major employers, including semiconductor manufacturer TSMC (Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co.), continue to invest billions of dollars in facilities in the Phoenix area.
Air quality regulations tied to ozone nonattainment status can influence permitting requirements, industrial expansion, and transportation planning, making federal classification decisions a key factor in long-term economic planning.
Maricopa County was reclassified from “marginal” to “moderate” nonattainment status in 2022 according to the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) after failing to meet federal ozone standards, triggering additional planning requirements under the Clean Air Act.
County officials said they will continue pursuing strategies to reduce emissions and improve air quality while working within the existing regulatory framework.
Philip McNeely, Director of the Maricopa County Air Quality Department, said, “By maintaining moderate nonattainment status, Maricopa County can continue to focus on reducing pollution and finding solutions specific to our area. These include outreach, incentive programs for residents, practical compliance tools for business, and the pursuit of innovative emission-reduction credit rules. We are committed to clean air initiatives that make Maricopa County a healthier place to live.”
On a crisp, sun-drenched afternoon in the spring of 2023, I found myself walking down Constitution Avenue in Washington, D.C., in front of the William Jefferson Clinton Building, headquarters of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Standing in its shadow, I wondered when, or if, sanity would ever return to the building. My mind drifted to the regulatory malfeasance that gave this agency power to treat carbon dioxide (CO2) as a pollutant, the 2009 Endangerment Finding.
For years, this bureaucratic decree masqueraded as settled science. Climate zealots claimed CO2 and other greenhouse gases threatened public health as agents of planetary overheating, ignoring both a paucity of supporting data and contradictory evidence that inexorably accumulated.
Now, three years after my visit, EPA has rescinded the regulation as it applies to motor vehicles. The basis of its action is twofold: First, the agency has concluded that by attempting to regulate greenhouse gases, EPA exceeded its authority under the 1970 Clean Air Act. Second, the environmental effect of regulating tailpipe emissions of greenhouse gases is negligible.
There is more to be done. Reason and good sense would have the EPA remove the Endangerment Finding’s hold over industrial emissions of greenhouse gases, like those coming from power plants, and would undertake to dismantle the rule’s flimsy scientific justifications.
Nevertheless, EPA’s action undermines an ideological foundation for the broad attacks on fossil fuels that have constrained American prosperity and choked the developing world’s aspirations for modern lifestyles.
The 2009 regulation was used to justify the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan – part of the so-called War on Coal – and tailpipe emissions standards that forced unwanted electric vehicles onto dealership lots. The rule has contributed to the closing of power plants, energy shortages, high electricity prices, and multiple billion-dollar losses for car manufacturers whose customers mostly prefer internal combustion engines. It has also fueled endless litigation against producers of hydrocarbon fuels.
Because CO2 is necessary for all life, beginning with its role in plant photosynthesis, regulation of the gas gave EPA jurisdiction over the entire U.S. economy. Climate crusaders abroad followed EPA’s lead.
Worldwide, the economic waste resulting from the rule is staggering. The Climate Policy Initiative estimates that between 2011 and 2020 that climate spending totaled $4.8 trillion. Estimates for “energy transition investment” – money dumped into the wind, solar and EV rat hole – was $2.3 trillion in 2025 alone.
That is trillions diverted from healthcare, infrastructure, education and genuine alleviation of suffering and advancement of human flourishing. Imagine those resources being directed to improving carbon-intensive energy sectors that have produced the wealthiest and healthiest civilizations in all of history.
Since the dawn of the industrial age, we have witnessed an unprecedented increase in global life expectancy. We have seen a drastic reduction in deaths from natural disasters – not because the weather is milder, but because people are better protected by modern infrastructure and technology made possible by fossil fuels. We have achieved historic highs in agricultural production, feeding a population of 8 billion.
CO2 has played a pivotal role in the greening of the Earth, acting as an atmospheric fertilizer that boosts crop yields and expands forests. Even methane, demonized alongside CO2, is merely a byproduct of a livestock industry essential for providing protein to a ballooning global population. Emissions of neither gas contribute significantly to global temperatures.
Once the EPA designated CO2 a legal hazard, U.S. diplomats, aid agencies and technical experts carried that framing into global climate negotiations, development programs and financing arrangements.
Over time, the EPA’s stance became a de facto reference point for regulators elsewhere. If the U.S. “gold standard” for environmental protection treated CO2 as an endangerment, ministries from Europe to Asia would use similar language in national climate laws.
With the EPA backing away from its regulation of greenhouse gases, developing countries should waste no time in severing whatever restrictions Western climate overseers have placed on their use of fossil fuels. For too long, climate policies have impeded economic growth and denied access to reliable supplies of electricity, to safer indoor fuels for cooking and heating, to refrigeration and to clean water. The result has been higher rates of morbidity and mortality among the world’s poor.
CO2 is not the enemy of humankind. Misguided attempts to criminalize its emissions are!
Vijay Jayaraj is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundationand Science and Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Fairfax, Va.He holds an M.S. in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia and a postgraduate degree in energy management from Robert Gordon University, both in the U.K., and a bachelor’s in engineering from Anna University, India. He served as a research associate with the Changing Oceans Research Unit at University of British Columbia, Canada.
