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 "Phasedown of Hydrofluorocarbons: Management of Certain Hydrofluorocarbons and Substitutes Under the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act of 2020".
- Sponsor
- Sen. Marshall, Roger [R-KS]
- Committees
- Environment and Public Works Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Feb 5, 2025
Bottom line
This resolution is a legislative attempt to block an EPA rule that regulates hydrofluorocarbons, effectively halting a key climate change mitigation effort related to refrigerants and other industrial gases.
What it actually does
This joint resolution seeks to nullify a rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concerning the phasedown of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and the management of certain HFCs and substitutes. Utilizing the Congressional Review Act (CRA), it aims to prevent the EPA's rule, published on October 11, 2024, from taking effect, thereby stopping the implementation of specific regulations under the American Innovation and Manufacturing (AIM) Act of 2020.
Proponents argue
Proponents of the resolution argue that the EPA's HFC phasedown rule imposes undue burdens on industries, increases costs for consumers, and oversteps the agency's regulatory authority. They may contend that the rule stifles innovation, creates unnecessary compliance complexities, and negatively impacts sectors reliant on HFC technologies without sufficient economic justification.
Opponents contend
Opponents of the resolution argue that disapproving the EPA rule would undermine critical efforts to combat climate change and fulfill the objectives of the bipartisan AIM Act of 2020. They assert that the HFC phasedown is essential for reducing potent greenhouse gas emissions, promoting the development of climate-friendly alternatives, and ensuring U.S. leadership in environmental technology, while also providing regulatory certainty for industries transitioning away from HFCs.
The bill text is extremely short and can be read in seconds, making it highly accessible for any reader.
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 "Phasedown of Hydrofluorocarbons: Management of Certain Hydrofluorocarbons and Substitutes Under the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act of 2020" (89 Fed. Reg. 82682 (October 11, 2024)), and such rule shall have no force or effect.
Disapproval of EPA Hydrofluorocarbon Phasedown Rule
This provision explicitly states that Congress disapproves of the Environmental Protection Agency's rule titled "Phasedown of Hydrofluorocarbons: Management of Certain Hydrofluorocarbons and Substitutes Under the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act of 2020," which was published on October 11, 2024. By disapproving the rule, the resolution declares that the EPA's regulation will have no legal standing or effect, effectively preventing its implementation.
Supporters argue
Supporters of the resolution argue that the EPA's rule imposes unnecessary costs and regulatory burdens on businesses, particularly small businesses, and consumers. They contend that the market should drive innovation and transition to alternatives, rather than government mandates, and that the rule's requirements are overly prescriptive or economically damaging.
Critics contend
Opponents of the resolution argue that disapproving the rule would undermine the intent of the bipartisan American Innovation and Manufacturing (AIM) Act of 2020, which directed the EPA to phase down HFCs. They assert that the rule is a crucial step in reducing potent greenhouse gases, fostering U.S. competitiveness in climate-friendly technologies, and meeting international climate commitments.
Tradeoffs
The provision highlights the tension between regulatory intervention to address environmental concerns and concerns about economic burdens and government overreach. It forces a choice between accelerating the transition away from HFCs, as mandated by the AIM Act, and allowing market forces or less stringent regulations to dictate the pace, potentially at the expense of environmental goals.