Overview

Title

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to Review of Final Rule Reclassification of Major Sources as Area Sources Under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act.

ELI5 AI

S. J. RES. 31 is a plan from the Senate to stop a rule made by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) about changing how big polluting sources are labeled, so that things can stay the same for now.

Summary AI

S. J. RES. 31 is a joint resolution that allows for Congress to disapprove of a specific rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This rule involves the "Review of Final Rule Reclassification of Major Sources as Area Sources Under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act." If this resolution is passed, the disapproved EPA rule will lose its legal effect. The resolution was introduced in the Senate by Mr. Curtis and co-sponsored by Mrs. Capito, Mr. Cramer, and Ms. Lummis.

Published

2025-03-06
Congress: 119
Session: 1
Chamber: SENATE
Status: Introduced in Senate
Date: 2025-03-06
Package ID: BILLS-119sjres31is

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
1
Words:
247
Pages:
2
Sentences:
5

Language

Nouns: 98
Verbs: 16
Adjectives: 5
Adverbs: 1
Numbers: 14
Entities: 29

Complexity

Average Token Length:
4.34
Average Sentence Length:
49.40
Token Entropy:
4.38
Readability (ARI):
27.30

AnalysisAI

General Summary of the Bill

The joint resolution S. J. RES. 31 seeks to express Congress's disapproval of a rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This rule pertains to the reclassification of major sources of air pollution as area sources under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act. By passing this resolution, Congress intends to nullify the effect of the rule that was documented in the Federal Register on September 10, 2024.

Significant Issues

One significant issue with the resolution lies in the lack of details regarding the specific content or implications of the EPA rule that is being disapproved. The document provides no clear context or understanding of why this rule was introduced in the first place or what it entails, making it difficult to grasp the concerns or issues it may raise.

Furthermore, the reasoning behind the disapproval is not disclosed. Without an explanation, the rationale behind the legislative action remains ambiguous, which could lead to challenges in public understanding and legal interpretations in the future.

Adding to this, there is no discussion about the potential impacts or consequences of rejecting this rule. Depending on what the rule was designed to regulate, disapproving it could have significant repercussions for environmental protections under the Clean Air Act.

Lastly, there is a reference to a publication in the Federal Register, which might not be immediately clear or accessible to a broad audience without further context or explanation. This lack of clarity makes it challenging for stakeholders and the public to assess the importance of the regulation.

Impact on the Public

The general public might experience limited immediate effects from this resolution, mainly because the precise content and implications of the rule are not clear. However, the public's concern should focus on how this disapproval might affect air quality regulations and protections that are intended to safeguard community health and environmental standards.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

Specific stakeholders, such as businesses categorized as major pollution sources and environmental advocacy groups, might experience different impacts. For businesses, this disapproval could potentially ease regulatory requirements, assuming the rule posed additional compliance burdens. This could translate to less stringent environmental regulations and possibly reduce costs associated with compliance.

On the other hand, for environmental advocacy groups and public health organizations, the disapproval might represent a step back in environmental protection efforts. Any weakening of standards governing the reclassification of pollution sources could hinder progress in reducing air pollution and protecting public health.

Overall, the lack of transparency surrounding the resolution and the rule it addresses complicates predicting the full breadth of its impact. Consequently, both local communities and broader stakeholders should remain informed and engaged in follow-up actions and discussions that might clarify or reaffirm the implications of this legislative action.

Issues

  • The bill lacks details on the content or implications of the Environmental Protection Agency rule being disapproved, making it unclear what specific issues or concerns are being addressed. This is significant as it can obscure the legislative intent and impact on stakeholders. [SECTIONS]

  • The reasoning behind the disapproval of the rule is not provided, leaving the rationale ambiguous. This lack of clarity could impact public understanding and acceptance, as well as future legal interpretations. [SECTIONS]

  • The text does not discuss the potential impact or consequences of disapproving the rule, which could be significant for the regulatory framework and environmental protections intended by the Clean Air Act. [SECTIONS]

  • The reference to '89 Fed. Reg. 73293 (September 10, 2024)' may not be readily comprehensible without additional context, making it difficult for the public and stakeholders to assess the importance and implications of the regulation being disapproved. [SECTIONS]

Sections

Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.

Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

Congress has decided to reject a rule from the Environmental Protection Agency that deals with how major sources of pollution are categorized under the Clean Air Act, meaning this rule will not be implemented.