Congressional Disapproval of EPA Waste Emissions Charge Rule
February 4, 2025
Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.
Where This Stands
Current status: signed.
Version history
Only one version on file - nothing to compare yet. As later stages (committee substitute, engrossed, enrolled) are captured, the redline appears here.
View official text →The Frame
The resolution prevents the implementation of an EPA rule that would have established procedures for waste emissions charges on petroleum and natural gas systems, directly impacting the regulatory compliance requirements for those industries.
Potentially affected actors named in the source documents. Mention is not a position.
Petroleum and Natural Gas Industry
The industry is no longer subject to the specific compliance procedures and emissions charge rules outlined in the nullified EPA regulation.
Environmental Protection Agency
The agency is prohibited from implementing or enforcing the specific rule that was disapproved by Congress.
Current stage: signed.
Next step not available in the current record.
Summary
Key Facts
- Congress formally disapproved the EPA rule titled 'Waste Emissions Charge for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems: Procedures for Facilitating Compliance, Including Netting and Exemptions'.
- The rule is declared to have no force or effect.
- The resolution was passed under the authority of chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code.
- The resolution was approved on March 14, 2025.
- The House passed the resolution on February 26, 2025.
- The Senate passed the resolution on February 27, 2025.
- The rule being nullified was originally published in the Federal Register on November 18, 2024 (89 Fed. Reg. 91094).
Why It Matters
The resolution prevents the implementation of an EPA rule that would have established procedures for waste emissions charges on petroleum and natural gas systems, directly impacting the regulatory compliance requirements for those industries.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the EPA rule still in effect?
What does this resolution do?
News Coverage
Lobbying Activity
60 Plus Association
2026
“Signed a coalition letter opposing any efforts to raise the corporate tax rate above the 21% level set in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA). Signed a coalition in support of the Family Business Legacy Act, H.R. 6329. This legislation creates parity in the tax code between the estate and gift taxes by allowing an estate tax deduction for contributions to 501(c)(4), (c)(5), and (c)(6) organizations. Signed a coalition letter urging opposition to proposals that would raise taxes on carried interest investment income.The letter is urging Congress to reject the misnamed Carried Interest Fairness Act, legislation recently reintroduced by Senators Tammy Baldwin, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and other progressive members of Congress. This legislation that would increase the tax rate on carried interest investment by 70%, from 23.8% to 40.8%. Signed a coalition letter in support of H.R.574 - ALIGN Act and highlight the 100% bonus depreciation provision's importance as the tax cut reauthorization efforts continue. Signed a coalition to support of repealing IRA's green new deal subsidies in reconciliation to pay for tax cuts. Signed a coalition letter regarding digital services taxes (DST) in an effort to stop Canadas imposition of a discriminatory digital services tax (DST) on U.S. firms and your efforts to include restrictions on the imposition of DSTs and other unfair digital policies in recently announced trade agreements-providing a model for future trade negotiations. Signed a coalition letter urging the President to index capital gains for inflation.”
ILLINOIS ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL BOARDS
ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND POLICY CENTER
Voting Record
Total
99
Yes
52
No
47
Present
0
Not Voting
0
Abstain
0
How they voted (99)
John Cornyn
R · yes
Martin Heinrich
D · no
Steve Daines
R · yes
Richard Durbin
D · no
Jon Husted
R · yes
Ruben Gallego
D · no
Lindsey Graham
R · yes
Cindy Hyde-Smith
R · yes
David McCormick
R · yes
Elizabeth Warren
D · no
Ashley Moody
R · yes
Ron Wyden
D · no
Ben Lujan
D · no
John Fetterman
D · no
John Curtis
R · yes
Maggie Hassan
D · no
Mike Rounds
R · yes
Josh Hawley
R · yes
Chuck Grassley
R · yes
Susan Collins
R · yes
John Barrasso
R · yes
Lisa Blunt Rochester
D · no
Richard Blumenthal
D · no
Mitch McConnell
R · yes
+ 75 more
Total
426
Yes
220
No
206
Present
0
Not Voting
0
Abstain
0
How they voted (426)
Sarah McBride
D · no
Mike Bost
R · yes
Rosa DeLauro
D · no
Troy Downing
R · yes
Barry Loudermilk
R · yes
Zoe Lofgren
D · no
Mike Flood
R · yes
Nicholas Langworthy
R · yes
Jahana Hayes
D · no
Bill Foster
D · no
Gregory Meeks
D · no
Raul Ruiz
D · no
Gilbert Cisneros
D · no
Val Hoyle
D · no
Ronny Jackson
R · yes
W. Steube
R · yes
Russell Fry
R · yes
Michael Lawler
R · yes
Gary Palmer
R · yes
Erin Houchin
R · yes
Lois Frankel
D · no
Veronica Escobar
D · no
Jonathan Jackson
D · no
Cliff Bentz
R · yes
+ 402 more
Discoveries
Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.
Use of Congressional Review Act
The document demonstrates the use of the Congressional Review Act to quickly nullify a regulation finalized in the final months of the previous administration.
Connected Entities
Sources
www.congress.gov
Analysis Score
0–100- Significance85How much this matters to a regular citizen
- Controversy75Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
- Entertainment20Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
- Buzz60Current news / social attention level
Publisher tools