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 "National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Integrated Iron and Steel Manufacturing Facilities Technology Review: Interim Final Rule".

Bill Number: S.J.Res. 67
Origin Chamber: Senate
Congress: 119th Congress, Session 1
Policy Area: Environmental Protection
Status: Introduced
Latest Action: 2025-07-22: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Last Updated: 2026-04-06T12:42:33Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

This joint resolution (S.J. Res. 67) aims to block a specific rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The rule sets national standards for hazardous air pollutants from integrated iron and steel manufacturing facilities. By disapproving the rule, Congress seeks to prevent it from taking effect, using a process known as the Congressional Review Act (CRA), which allows lawmakers to overturn certain federal agency regulations.

Key Provisions

Disapproval of the Rule: The resolution explicitly disapproves the EPA's "National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Integrated Iron and Steel Manufacturing Facilities Technology Review: Interim Final Rule," published in the Federal Register on July 3, 2025 (90 Fed. Reg. 29485).
Nullification: If passed, the rule would have no legal force or effect, meaning the EPA could not enforce it.
Legislative Process: Introduced in the Senate on July 22, 2025, by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, it was referred to the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works for review.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

This resolution does not amend broader laws like the Clean Air Act, under which the EPA issued the rule. Instead, it invokes the CRA (chapter 8 of title 5, U.S. Code) to override the specific interim final rule without altering the underlying authority for emission standards.
It prevents the implementation of updated technology-based limits on pollutants (e.g., heavy metals and acids) from steel production processes, effectively maintaining the status quo from prior regulations.

Potential Impacts

On Government Agencies: The EPA would be barred from enforcing this rule, potentially limiting its ability to regulate air pollution in the steel sector until new rulemaking occurs. This could strain agency resources if legal challenges follow.
On Citizens and Environment: Communities near steel facilities might face continued exposure to hazardous air pollutants without the rule's stricter controls, potentially affecting public health (e.g., respiratory issues). However, it avoids immediate compliance costs that could raise steel prices for consumers.
On Industry: Integrated iron and steel manufacturers would not need to adopt the reviewed technologies or controls outlined in the rule, reducing operational costs but possibly delaying environmental improvements.
International Relations: Minimal direct impact, though it could influence U.S. commitments under global climate agreements by slowing reductions in industrial emissions.

Main Stakeholders Affected

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Loses authority to implement the rule, affecting its regulatory agenda.
Iron and Steel Industry: Major beneficiaries, as facilities (e.g., those operated by companies like U.S. Steel or Nucor) avoid new emission controls and associated expenses.
Environmental and Health Advocacy Groups: Adversely affected, as they pushed for stronger pollution limits to protect air quality and public health.
Congress and Lawmakers: Empowers congressional oversight of executive actions, particularly those from Democratic-led administrations (noting the Democratic sponsor).
Local Communities and Workers: Residents near facilities may see unchanged pollution levels; industry workers could benefit from stable job conditions without regulatory disruptions.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

Legal: Relies on the CRA, a 1996 law designed to give Congress a "look-back" window (up to 60 legislative days) to veto agency rules with a simple majority vote and no presidential signature needed if passed by both chambers. This could face court challenges if seen as undermining the Clean Air Act's delegation of authority to the EPA.
Constitutional: Reinforces the separation of powers by allowing the legislative branch to check executive rulemaking, aligning with Article I's grant of lawmaking authority to Congress. However, it raises questions about the balance between environmental protection mandates and industry deregulation.
Political: Highlights partisan divides on environmental regulation; as an interim final rule (which takes effect before full public comment), it underscores tensions over expedited agency actions. Passage would signal congressional intent to roll back Biden-era (or similar) pollution controls, potentially setting a precedent for future CRA uses against other agencies.

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

2025-07-22: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
2025-07-22: 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 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Integrated Iron and Steel Manufacturing Facilities Technology Review: Interim Final Rule. — issued 2025-07-22 — PDF (2 pages)