Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
This resolution uses a special congressional procedure to reject a federal agency rule. It declares that the Environmental Protection Agency's final rule on trichloroethylene under the Toxic Substances Control Act has no force or effect. If enacted, the agency would also be barred from issuing a substantially similar rule without new legislation. The resolution is a binding joint resolution under the Congressional Review Act.
Trichloroethylene (TCE); Regulation Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), final rule published at 89 Fed. Reg. 102568 (December 17, 2024).
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Under the Congressional Review Act, the Senate considers disapproval resolutions under expedited procedures that prevent filibusters, so passage in the Senate requires only a simple majority. As a joint resolution, it must be passed by both chambers and presented to the President for signature or veto.
This joint resolution invokes chapter 8 of title 5, U.S. Code (the Congressional Review Act) to disapprove the Environmental Protection Agency’s final rule titled "Trichloroethylene (TCE); Regulation Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)" (89 Fed.
Reg. 102568, Dec. 17, 2024).
If enacted, the resolution would nullify that EPA rule and render it without force or effect.
Content is narrow and implementable, improving prospects in one chamber, but contentious policy area and lack of compromise reduce overall chances.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise Congressional Review Act disapproval resolution that clearly identifies the specific EPA final rule to be nullified and uses a direct, legally effective statement to remove the rule's force. It does not provide explanatory findings, fiscal analysis, or handling of downstream or edge-case consequences.
Progressives emphasize public-health risks from removing the TCE rule.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize public-health risks from removing the TCE rule.
Likely to oppose the resolution because it overturns an EPA public-health regulation aimed at restricting a toxic chemical.
Sees the move as undermining scientific regulation and worker/community protections unless strong evidence shows harms from the EPA rule.
Would emphasize protecting health, environment, and TSCA’s authority.
Mixed view: supports congressional oversight of agencies but cautious about using the CRA to eliminate a health-protective rule without clear alternatives.
Wants evidence on EPA’s risk assessments, economic impacts, and consideration of incremental fixes rather than full disapproval.
Likely to support the resolution as a corrective to what is seen as EPA regulatory overreach under TSCA.
Sees disapproval as protecting businesses, reducing compliance costs, and rebalancing executive-agency rulemaking authority toward Congress and states.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Content is narrow and implementable, improving prospects in one chamber, but contentious policy area and lack of compromise reduce overall chances.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize public-health risks from removing the TCE rule.
Content is narrow and implementable, improving prospects in one chamber, but contentious policy area and lack of compromise reduce overall…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise Congressional Review Act disapproval resolution that clearly identifies the specific EPA final rule to be nullified and uses a direct, legally effective…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.