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 Disapproval; Colorado; Regional Haze Plan for the Second Implementation Period".
- Sponsor
- Sen. Bennet, Michael F. [D-CO]
- Committees
- Environment and Public Works Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Apr 29, 2026
Bottom line
This resolution uses the CRA to block an EPA rule that found Colorado's regional haze plan insufficient, effectively affirming Colorado's state-level environmental approach over federal intervention.
What it actually does
This joint resolution, introduced under the Congressional Review Act (CRA), seeks to nullify a specific rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA rule, titled "Air Plan Disapproval; Colorado; Regional Haze Plan for the Second Implementation Period," pertains to the adequacy of Colorado's state plan for reducing regional haze and improving visibility in national parks and wilderness areas. If enacted, S.J. Res. 139 would prevent the EPA's disapproval of Colorado's plan from taking effect, thereby allowing Colorado's original plan to stand or preventing a federal replacement plan.
Proponents argue
Supporters of S.J. Res. 139 argue that the EPA's disapproval of Colorado's regional haze plan represents federal overreach and undermines state authority in managing environmental regulations. They contend that Colorado's plan is adequate for addressing regional haze and that the EPA's rule imposes unnecessary burdens or mandates that are not tailored to the state's specific conditions. Proponents often advocate for greater state flexibility and local control in implementing environmental protection measures.
Opponents contend
Opponents of S.J. Res. 139, who support the EPA's original rule, argue that Colorado's regional haze plan does not adequately meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act to protect visibility in national parks and wilderness areas. They assert that federal oversight is crucial to ensure consistent and effective environmental protection across states, especially for issues like regional haze that cross state lines. Critics of the resolution would emphasize the importance of strong federal standards to safeguard public health and preserve natural resources for future generations.
The bill text is extremely short and straightforward, making it very accessible for any reader to understand its direct legislative action.
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to "Air Plan Disapproval; Colorado; Regional Haze Plan for the Second Implementation Period" (91 Fed. Reg. 3048 (January 26, 2026)), and such rule shall have no force or effect.
Disapproval of EPA's Colorado Regional Haze Rule
This provision explicitly states that Congress disapproves of a specific rule published by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on January 26, 2026, concerning Colorado's Regional Haze Plan. By disapproving this rule, the resolution ensures that the EPA's decision to reject Colorado's state-level plan for reducing air pollution and improving visibility in protected areas will not take effect. Consequently, the EPA would be prevented from imposing a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) or requiring Colorado to revise its existing plan based on that specific disapproval.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that this provision is essential for upholding states' rights and preventing federal overreach. They believe that Colorado is capable of managing its own environmental regulations and that the EPA's rule was an unnecessary intrusion that could impose undue economic burdens or impractical requirements on the state. This action allows Colorado's chosen approach to regional haze to proceed.
Critics contend
Opponents contend that this provision undermines the EPA's critical role in ensuring compliance with federal environmental laws, specifically the Clean Air Act's mandate to reduce regional haze. They argue that if Colorado's plan was indeed insufficient, as the EPA determined, then nullifying the EPA's disapproval could lead to continued poor air quality and reduced visibility in protected natural areas, failing to meet national environmental goals.
Tradeoffs
The primary tension is between federal regulatory authority and state autonomy in environmental policy. It also highlights the balance between potentially stricter federal standards aimed at achieving environmental goals and the desire for states to implement more flexible or less costly solutions.