S.J.Res. 31 · 119th Congress · Senate

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 "Review of Final Rul

Signed into LawEnvironment

Introduced 2025-03-06 · Sponsored by Sen. Curtis, John R. [R-UT] (R-UT) · Last updated 2026-03-31

Last action (2025-06-20): Became Public Law No: 119-20.

Summary

Lets industrial facilities that cut their pollution enough to reclassify from "major" to "area" sources actually get the regulatory relief that comes with that lower classification. An EPA rule had locked them into the stricter major-source standards permanently, even after they reduced emissions. Congress overturned that rule, restoring the incentive to clean up.

The Good

+

Allows facilities to reduce regulatory burden by reclassifying

The overturned rule required facilities that had been classified as major sources of hazardous air pollutants to continue meeting major source standards even after reducing emissions enough to qualify as area sources. Reversing this rewards facilities that successfully cut emissions.

+

Provides incentive for pollution reduction

If facilities can move to less stringent area source standards by reducing emissions, it creates a financial incentive to invest in cleaner processes. The EPA rule removed this incentive by locking facilities into major source requirements permanently.

The Bad

-

Creates a loophole for persistent and bioaccumulative toxins

The EPA specifically designed the rule for facilities emitting persistent, bioaccumulative hazardous air pollutants like mercury, lead, and dioxins. These substances accumulate in the environment and food chain. Allowing reclassification means less monitoring and fewer controls on some of the most dangerous pollutants.

-

Reclassification may not reflect actual environmental improvement

Facilities can qualify as area sources by implementing pollution controls that reduce emissions on paper while still operating the same processes. The underlying hazard potential remains; only the measured output changes. The EPA rule was designed to prevent this regulatory gaming.

Vote Record

House, 2025-05-22

216 Yea212 Nay0 NV
Republicans
216Y / 1N / 3NV
Democrats
0Y / 211N / 1NV

Passed Congress.gov — House Roll Call #143

House vote by state

AK
ME
WI
VT
NH
WA
ID
MT
ND
MN
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
WY
SD
IA
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CT
RI
CA
UT
CO
NE
MO
KY
WV
VA
DC
DE
MD
AZ
NM
KS
AR
TN
NC
SC
TX
OK
LA
MS
AL
GA
HI
FL

Hover over a state to see its delegation

Republican majority Yea
Bipartisan split
No vote data

Senate, 2025-05-01

52 Yea46 Nay0 NV
Republicans
52Y / 0N / 1NV
Democrats
0Y / 44N / 1NV
Independents
0Y / 2N

Passed Congress.gov — Senate Roll Call #229

Senate vote by state

AK
ME
WI
VT
NH
WA
ID
MT
ND
MN
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
WY
SD
IA
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CT
RI
CA
UT
CO
NE
MO
KY
WV
VA
DC
DE
MD
AZ
NM
KS
AR
TN
NC
SC
TX
OK
LA
MS
AL
GA
HI
FL

Hover over a state to see its delegation

Republican majority Yea
Bipartisan split
No vote data

Senate, 2025-04-30

52 Yea40 Nay0 NV
Republicans
52Y / 0N / 1NV
Democrats
0Y / 39N / 6NV
Independents
0Y / 1N / 1NV

Passed Congress.gov — Senate Roll Call #227

Senate vote by state

AK
ME
WI
VT
NH
WA
ID
MT
ND
MN
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
WY
SD
IA
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CT
RI
CA
UT
CO
NE
MO
KY
WV
VA
DC
DE
MD
AZ
NM
KS
AR
TN
NC
SC
TX
OK
LA
MS
AL
GA
HI
FL

Hover over a state to see its delegation

Republican majority Yea
Bipartisan split
No vote data

All Sources

Everything on this page ties back to one of these. Click through if you want to check.