Congress Moves to Scrap EPA's South Dakota Air Quality Plan: What It Means for Regional Haze

This joint resolution is Congress’s way of hitting the undo button on a specific rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The rule in question is the EPA’s plan for managing “regional haze” in South Dakota—a plan that was meant to cover the second implementation period for air quality improvements. If this resolution passes, that EPA rule, officially published in the Federal Register, will be wiped clean and have zero legal effect. Essentially, Congress is using its oversight power to reject the federal government’s specific approach to cleaning up South Dakota’s air, keeping the state’s air quality management where it was before the EPA stepped in.

The Haze Factor: Why Visibility Matters

Regional haze is a technical term for the smog and air pollution that obscures the view in national parks and wilderness areas. Think of it as the air getting murky, and it’s caused by emissions from sources like power plants, factories, and vehicles, often traveling hundreds of miles. The EPA rule Congress is trying to reject was designed to implement the Clean Air Act’s requirements to improve visibility in places like the Badlands or Mount Rushmore. For the average person, this isn't just about a pretty view; these haze controls often mean better air quality overall, which affects everything from asthma rates to general respiratory health. By nullifying the EPA’s plan, Congress is blocking a specific federal effort to reduce these pollutants in and around South Dakota.

Who Benefits from the Regulatory Reversal?

When Congress uses this specific tool—the Congressional Review Act—to scrap a rule, it usually signals that the rule was perceived as overly burdensome or unnecessary by some stakeholders. The immediate beneficiaries here are likely the industries and facilities in South Dakota that would have been required to install new pollution controls or change operations under the rejected EPA plan. For example, a power plant that might have faced millions in compliance costs to meet the EPA’s haze standards now gets a reprieve. This can translate to lower operating costs for those businesses, which they might argue helps keep consumer prices stable or preserves local jobs.

The Real-World Impact on Air Quality and Oversight

The flip side is that this resolution removes a layer of federal environmental oversight. The EPA develops these specific plans when they determine a state’s own plan isn't strong enough to meet federal clean air goals. By rejecting the EPA’s rule, Congress is effectively saying the state’s existing approach is sufficient, or at least that the federal intervention is unwarranted. For residents, particularly those in South Dakota or downwind states, this means the air quality improvements promised by the EPA’s stricter plan are off the table. If you live near a facility that contributes to regional haze, this could mean a longer wait for clearer skies and cleaner air. This action raises a broader question about the balance of power: should technical environmental standards be set by agency experts, or should Congress routinely step in to override them, especially when the issue involves public health and environmental protection?