A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to "Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category-Deadline Extensions; Correction".
- Bill Number
- S.J.Res. 120
- Origin Chamber
- Senate
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 2
- Policy Area
- Environmental Protection
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2026-03-09: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
- Last Updated
- 2026-03-12T18:48:00Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
This joint resolution (S.J. Res. 120) aims to disapprove a specific rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Congressional Review Act (CRA). The CRA allows Congress to review and potentially overturn certain federal agency rules shortly after they are finalized, preventing them from taking effect.
Key Provisions
- Disapproval of EPA Rule: The resolution explicitly disapproves the EPA's rule titled "Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category—Deadline Extensions; Correction," published in the Federal Register (91 Fed. Reg. 4016) on January 30, 2026.
- Nullification: Once passed, the rule would have no legal force or effect, meaning the EPA could not implement or enforce it.
- Legislative Process: Introduced in the Senate on March 9, 2026, by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse and referred to the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works for review.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- This resolution does not amend statutes but invokes the CRA to block an administrative rule, effectively reversing the EPA's action without altering underlying laws like the Clean Water Act (which governs effluent limitations, or restrictions on pollutant discharges into U.S. waters).
- It prevents extensions or corrections to deadlines for pollution control standards in the steam electric power sector, potentially reverting to prior timelines or requirements.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: Limits the EPA's regulatory authority in this area, requiring it to halt implementation and possibly redirect resources to other environmental priorities. It could set a precedent for congressional intervention in agency rulemaking.
- On Citizens: May affect water quality near power plants by not extending deadlines for reducing pollutants like mercury or arsenic from coal-fired facilities, potentially leading to prolonged environmental risks or health concerns for communities reliant on affected waterways.
- On Industry: Benefits steam electric power generators (e.g., coal and gas plants) by avoiding stricter or delayed compliance deadlines, reducing short-term operational costs but possibly increasing long-term environmental liabilities.
- International Relations: Minimal direct impact, though it could influence U.S. commitments under global environmental agreements by slowing domestic pollution controls.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Directly targeted, as its rulemaking is overturned.
- Steam Electric Power Industry: Power plants and utilities that generate electricity from steam (often fossil fuels) benefit from avoided regulatory burdens.
- Environmental and Public Health Groups: Adversely affected, as they may see weakened protections against water pollution.
- Local Communities and Citizens: Those near power plants or downstream water users, who could face ongoing pollution risks without the rule's corrections or extensions.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Reinforces the CRA's role as a check on executive branch agencies, ensuring Congress can swiftly nullify rules deemed excessive without needing new legislation. The rule's "no force or effect" status avoids judicial review challenges.
- Constitutional: Aligns with separation of powers by allowing legislative oversight of administrative actions, though it highlights tensions between branches when environmental regulations are politically contested.
- Political: As a disapproval resolution, it requires simple majorities in both chambers and presidential signature (or veto override), potentially signaling partisan divides on energy and environmental policy. Introduction by a Democratic senator in a future session (119th Congress, 2026) underscores ongoing debates over balancing industry needs with pollution controls.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Sen. Whitehouse, Sheldon [D-RI]
Recent Actions
- 2026-03-09: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
- 2026-03-09: Introduced in Senate
Bill Versions
- Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category—Deadline Extensions; Correction. — issued 2026-03-09 — PDF (2 pages)