If finalized, the proposal would codify how permitting authorities distinguish between construction of stationary sources and non-emitting components or structures, EPA said in a statement. It is intended to provide flexibility for source owners, operators and permitting authorities to determine on a case-by-case basis what constitutes the start of construction on a new stationary source or major modification before obtaining a new source review permit, the agency said.

The public comment period on the proposal closes June 29.

The move would provide “solutions to issues that have held up critical American infrastructure, and advance the next great technological forefront,” EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said in a statement. 

The proposal aligns with President Donald Trump’s executive order last July to accelerate federal permits of data center infrastructure. The order includes directives to streamline regulations under the Clean Air Act, among other laws.

Under the law, the new source review program requires pre-construction permits for stationary sources regardless of whether the work is for new construction or modification of existing sources. 

EPA contends, however, that from the beginning, the law has been ambiguous as to which types of construction are permissible before obtaining a permit.

The agency has announced several new source review program permit changes since last year. They include a modification last September to its “reactivation policy” that determined whether a new source review permit would be required to resume operation of an idle stationary source. 

Citing a 2023 legal challenge to the policy, EPA determined that the permit is no longer required for an existing major stationary source that has been idle but makes a change to resume operation—unless the change qualifies as a “major modification” under certain regulations.

In a policy alert, The Conference Board said that if the proposal is finalized, it could shorten development timelines. It noted that EPA cautions companies that, while they may begin construction of non-emitting components or structures, they do so “at their own risk” because a new source review permit can be denied or require major design changes. 

“Developers may view the proposal as an opportunity to reduce project uncertainty and accelerate construction schedules, particularly for large facilities with long lead times,” the Conference Board said.

Harvard Law School’s Environmental & Energy Law Program, however, defended the current pre-construction permitting system under the new source review program.

“Because [it] covers a variety of facilities, from paper mills and plastics production to power plants and auto manufacturing, any change to weaken the program can have widespread impacts across the country,” Harvard Law said on its website. “When EPA interprets the law more leniently, industry is allowed to undertake more construction projects that increase emissions without installing and operating emissions control technology.” The result can be dirtier air in nearby communities and negative health and environmental effects, it said..