2 versions

CosmeticWhat changed in PLACED ON CALENDAR SENATEcompared with INTRODUCED IN SENATE (Oct 1, 2025)

Technical corrections only. The v2 version of the bill includes updated procedural information, noting its placement on the Senate calendar and committee discharge. No substantive policy changes were made between v1 and v2.

S.J.Res. 86119th CongressIntroduced Oct 1, 2025

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; South Dakota; Regional Haze Plan for the Second Implementation Period".

Senate Committee DischargedEnvironmental ProtectionSubstantive

View bill text

Sponsor: Sen. Whitehouse, Sheldon [D-RI]
Committees: Environment and Public Works Committee (primary)
Last action: Jan 7, 2026

Bottom line

This resolution blocks an EPA rule designed to reduce regional haze in South Dakota, effectively maintaining the status quo prior to the rule's issuance.

What it actually does

This joint resolution uses the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to disapprove a final rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concerning South Dakota's Regional Haze Plan for its second implementation period. If enacted, the EPA rule, published on August 28, 2025, would have no legal force or effect, preventing its implementation.

Proponents argue

Proponents of this resolution argue that the EPA's rule imposes unnecessary or excessive regulatory burdens on South Dakota, potentially harming the state's economy or specific industries without commensurate environmental benefits. They contend that the rule may exceed the EPA's statutory authority or that states are better equipped to manage their own air quality plans. Disapproving the rule would prevent undue federal overreach and allow for more flexible, state-specific solutions.

Opponents contend

Opponents of this resolution argue that the EPA rule is a crucial step to improve air quality and visibility in national parks and wilderness areas within South Dakota, as mandated by the Clean Air Act's Regional Haze Program. They assert that the rule is based on sound science and is necessary to protect public health and natural resources. Disapproving the rule would undermine efforts to reduce air pollution and could lead to continued degradation of visibility and air quality.

The bill text is extremely short and clear, making it very accessible for a quick read and understanding of its direct action.

Section 1

Congressional Disapproval of EPA Rule

prominently featuredstraightforward

This provision explicitly states that Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) titled "Air Plan Approval; South Dakota; Regional Haze Plan for the Second Implementation Period," which was published in the Federal Register on August 28, 2025. It further declares that this EPA rule shall have no force or effect, meaning it cannot be implemented or enforced.

GroupImpactMechanismScale

GroupEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA)ImpactLoss of regulatory authorityMechanismThe resolution nullifies a specific EPA rule, preventing its implementation and enforcement.ScaleSpecific to one rule concerning South Dakota

GroupSouth Dakota state government and regulated industries (e.g., power plants, industrial facilities)ImpactAvoidance of new regulatory requirementsMechanismBy disapproving the EPA rule, affected entities in South Dakota will not be required to comply with its provisions, potentially saving compliance costs but also foregoing potential air quality improvements.ScaleState-specific, affecting entities subject to regional haze regulations

GroupPublic and visitors to national parks/wilderness areas in South DakotaImpactContinued or slower improvement in air quality/visibilityMechanismThe rule's disapproval means that anticipated improvements in regional haze and air quality, which the EPA rule aimed to achieve, will not occur or will be delayed.ScaleRegional, affecting air quality and visibility

Supporters argue

Supporters argue that nullifying the EPA rule prevents undue economic burden on South Dakota businesses and residents, allowing the state more flexibility in managing its environmental regulations. They may contend that the EPA's approach was overly prescriptive or not cost-effective, and that state-led initiatives are sufficient.

Critics contend

Opponents argue that this disapproval undermines critical efforts to protect public health and improve visibility in South Dakota's scenic areas. They assert that the EPA rule was a necessary measure to address regional haze, which contributes to poor air quality and impacts natural resources and tourism. Blocking the rule could lead to continued environmental degradation.

Tradeoffs

This provision highlights the tension between federal regulatory authority and state autonomy, as well as the balance between environmental protection goals and potential economic impacts on regulated industries. It forces a choice between immediate economic relief for some entities and long-term environmental benefits for the public.

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.