Begin Actual Construction in the New Source Review Preconstruction Permitting Program

Shawn Troxell of NW Faction Fund opposes the proposed changes to the Clean Air Act, arguing that the program will accelerate the construction of data centers that pollute air and water, deplete resources, and harm public health. The commenter calls for the proposal to be rejected to ensure communities have a say in permitting heavy industrial projects.

Jasmine Baker opposes the fast-tracking of data center construction, arguing that the government should not prioritize corporate interests over environmental protection. She calls for full, peer-reviewed studies to assess the impacts of these facilities on water, heat, and local ecosystems before any construction is permitted.

A private individual opposes the proposed action, arguing that allowing data centers to begin construction with only air permits will harm the environment. The commenter expresses concern for the health of future generations and argues that the policy prioritizes corporate profit over public well-being.

Deanna McLaughlin opposes the proposed action, arguing that data centers should not be permitted due to water scarcity and the need to preserve natural habitats. She expresses concern over environmental issues like fires and lack of snow, claiming that the project only benefits billionaires.

Shauna Bona opposes the proposed rule, arguing that it makes it too easy for corporations to build without considering the impacts on clean air and water. The commenter expresses concern that the action poses an existential threat to well-being and calls for the EPA to hold businesses accountable.

Tena Rohr argues that the EPA should maintain and strengthen requirements for air quality permits before construction on major polluting sources can begin. The commenter emphasizes the need for modeling to ensure national air quality standards are not violated to protect the environment and public health.

Sofia Baxter, a private resident of Utah, opposes the proposed rule because she believes allowing construction to begin before obtaining clean air clearances will harm the environment and public health. She argues that the proposal prioritizes investor profits over the protection of finite resources like water and air quality.

A private individual opposes the proposed preconstruction permitting program, arguing that it may lead to inadequate regulation of pollutants and environmental impacts. The commenter expresses concern that the proposal prioritizes the convenience of large companies over public health and demands unbiased research to prove the action won't cause harm.

A private individual opposes the proposed rule to begin construction before air quality impacts are proven. They argue that existing EPA regulations are necessary to protect air quality and that the proposed change lacks valid reasoning.