House Concurrent Memorial 2008 is a nonbinding request from the Arizona Legislature to the President of the United States and the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency asking them to change how Arizona is organized within EPA Region 9. The memorial urges the federal government, in order of preference, to move the EPA Region 9 office from California to Arizona, move Arizona to EPA Region 6 or Region 8, or create a new Intermountain West EPA region that would include Arizona, Idaho, Nevada, and Utah. It also asks for a dedicated EPA satellite office in Phoenix with a senior decision-maker who can handle permits, plans, and other regulatory matters affecting Arizona.
The memorial argues that Arizona’s air, water, waste, and permitting issues are not being handled efficiently from San Francisco and that the state’s environmental conditions differ significantly from those of other Region 9 states. It cites delays in coordination with the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, challenges involving ozone, PM2.5, PM10, regional haze, aquifer protection permits, underground injection control permits, hazardous waste disposal, landfill capacity, and recycling programs. The measure also emphasizes the need for local EPA leadership that understands Arizona-specific issues, including natural background emissions, international transport of pollution, and tribal and regional concerns.
Because this is a concurrent memorial rather than a statute, it does not change Arizona law directly. Its legal effect is limited to expressing the Legislature’s position and transmitting that request to federal officials. If acted on by the EPA or the President, the memorial could affect federal regional boundaries, staffing, permitting processes, and the relationship between Arizona agencies and EPA decision-makers, but any such changes would require federal action rather than state law.
The overall sentiment in the legislative record appears supportive but divided. The memorial passed both chambers, but the committee and floor votes show meaningful opposition, especially in the House and Senate third-reading votes. Supporters appear to view the measure as a practical response to regulatory delays and a way to improve responsiveness to Arizona’s environmental needs, while opponents likely questioned the necessity, feasibility, or political framing of moving EPA offices or regions.
The main points of contention are the proposal to relocate EPA Region 9 or redraw regional boundaries, the criticism of California-based leadership, and the assertion that EPA Region 9 has not adequately recognized Arizona’s circumstances. Supporters emphasize local control, faster permitting, and better coordination with state, local, tribal, and regulated entities; critics may object to the memorial’s confrontational tone, its federalism implications, or the claim that Arizona should be separated from the broader Pacific Southwest region.
HCM2008 does not amend Arizona statutes or create new state regulatory authority; instead, it directs the Secretary of State to transmit a memorial urging federal changes to EPA regional organization and staffing. Its practical impact is to formally place the Arizona Legislature on record seeking a federal regional realignment or a local EPA presence in Phoenix, with the goal of improving permitting, compliance, and intergovernmental coordination on environmental matters affecting Arizona.
The bill’s sentiment is generally pro-Arizona and strongly critical of the current EPA Region 9 structure. It advanced through both chambers with majority support, indicating that many lawmakers agreed with the need for a more local and responsive EPA presence, but the recorded nay votes show that the proposal was not unanimous and drew notable resistance. The debate reflected a mix of frustration over regulatory delays and skepticism about the memorial’s proposed federal restructuring.
The most notable contention is whether Arizona should remain in EPA Region 9 at all, with the memorial explicitly ranking options from moving the regional office to Arizona to shifting Arizona into another region or creating a new region. Another point of dispute is the memorial’s criticism of San Francisco-based EPA leadership and its claims about delays, natural emissions, and Arizona-specific environmental conditions; supporters frame these as evidence of inefficiency, while opponents may view them as overstated or politically charged. The call for a Phoenix satellite office with real decision-making authority is also a significant issue, because it implies a substantial change in federal staffing and delegation of authority.