The Capitol LedgerEvery move in Congress, on the record
HomeBillsRecordsLedger AI

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

AboutFAQFeedbackTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

The projectAboutFAQFeedback
LegalTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

All bills
S.J.Res. 122·119th Congress·Introduced Mar 9, 2026

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 "Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Regional Haze Plan for the Second Implementation Period".

IntroducedEnvironmental ProtectionMajor
View bill text
Sponsor
Sen. Whitehouse, Sheldon [D-RI]
Committees
Environment and Public Works Committee (primary)
Last action
Mar 9, 2026

Bottom line

This resolution seeks to nullify an EPA rule concerning Indiana's regional haze plan, effectively blocking federal efforts to regulate air quality in the state under that specific program.

What it actually does

This joint resolution utilizes the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to disapprove a final rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA rule, titled "Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Regional Haze Plan for the Second Implementation Period," was published in the Federal Register on January 26, 2026. If enacted, this resolution would prevent the EPA rule from taking effect and prohibit the agency from reissuing a substantially similar rule without explicit congressional authorization.

Proponents argue

Proponents of this resolution argue that the EPA's rule oversteps federal authority, imposes undue burdens on Indiana's industries and economy, and interferes with the state's ability to manage its own environmental regulations. They might contend that the EPA's plan is either too stringent, not cost-effective, or based on flawed science, and that state-level solutions are more appropriate for regional haze issues.

Opponents contend

Opponents of this resolution, including environmental groups and the EPA, would argue that the EPA rule is necessary to protect public health and visibility in national parks and wilderness areas, as mandated by the Clean Air Act. They would assert that Indiana's state plan was insufficient to meet federal requirements for regional haze and that federal intervention is crucial to ensure compliance and achieve environmental goals.

The bill text is extremely short and can be read in less than a minute, making it highly accessible for immediate understanding of its direct action.

Section 1

Congressional Disapproval of EPA Regional Haze Rule

prominently featuredstraightforward

This provision explicitly states that Congress disapproves of the Environmental Protection Agency's rule concerning "Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Regional Haze Plan for the Second Implementation Period," which was published in the Federal Register on January 26, 2026 (91 Fed. Reg. 3057). By disapproving the rule under the Congressional Review Act (CRA), the resolution ensures that the EPA's rule will have no legal effect and prevents the agency from issuing a substantially similar rule in the future without new legislative authority.

GroupImpactMechanismScale
GroupEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA)ImpactLoss of regulatory authorityMechanismCongressional Review Act (CRA) disapprovalScaleSpecific to Indiana's regional haze plan
GroupState of IndianaImpactContinued reliance on state-level air quality plans or potential for less stringent regulationsMechanismFederal rule nullified, potentially leaving state plan in place or creating regulatory vacuumScaleStatewide
GroupIndustries in Indiana (e.g., power plants, manufacturing)ImpactReduced regulatory burden or delayed compliance costsMechanismAvoidance of federal mandates for emissions reductions related to regional hazeScalePotentially significant for affected facilities
GroupResidents and visitors in areas affected by regional haze (e.g., national parks, wilderness areas)ImpactPotential for continued or worsened visibility impairment and associated health impactsMechanismAbsence of federal requirements for emissions reductions aimed at improving visibilityScaleRegional, affecting air quality and public health

Supporters argue

Supporters argue that this disapproval protects Indiana's economic interests from what they view as an overreaching federal regulation. They contend that the EPA's rule imposes unnecessary costs on businesses and energy producers, potentially leading to job losses and increased energy prices, and that states are better equipped to manage their own environmental compliance.

Critics contend

Opponents argue that disapproving the EPA rule undermines critical efforts to improve air quality and protect natural resources, particularly visibility in national parks and wilderness areas. They assert that the EPA's action was a necessary step to ensure Indiana complies with its obligations under the Clean Air Act, and that blocking it will result in continued pollution and health risks.

Tradeoffs

The provision highlights the tension between federal environmental regulation aimed at achieving national air quality goals and state autonomy in managing local economic and environmental policies. It also balances the economic costs of compliance for industries against the public health and environmental benefits of improved air quality and visibility.

About this analysis. AI-Generated from the official bill text and available committee reports. Gaps in available data are noted explicitly. Verify important details with the official Congress.gov record.

On this page

  • Executive summary
  • Key provisions
  • Follow the money
  • Critical analysis
  • Questions to ask
  • Implementation
  • Political analysis
Ask Ledger AI about this