The bill (H.J.Res.34) provides for congressional disapproval under Chapter 8 of title 5 of the United States Code of the Environmental Protection Agency’s final rule on Trichloroethylene (TCE) under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). If enacted, the rule will have no force or effect.
The resolution is introduced in the 119th Congress by Rep. Harshbarger and Rep.
Miller-Meeks and targets the December 17, 2024 final rule published at 89 Fed. Reg. 102568.
This action removes federal regulatory constraints imposed by that specific TSCA rule and reflects Congress’s use of the Congressional Review Act to nullify agency rulemaking.
In practical terms, the disapproval test reasserts Congress’s oversight over federal regulatory actions. For compliance professionals, the immediate implication is the EPA’s TCE-focused regulatory framework would not take effect as planned, and regulated entities would not incur the rule’s obligations.
The measure does not, by itself, create an alternate federal standard, nor does it preclude other future rulemaking or state-level actions addressing TCE under TSCA or other authorities.
At a Glance
What It Does
The joint resolution disapproves the EPA final TSCA rule on Trichloroethylene and, under the Congressional Review Act, declares that rule void—having no force or effect.
Who It Affects
EPA, TSCA-regulated entities, and downstream users of TCE include chemical manufacturers, importers, and facilities employing TCE in their processes.
Why It Matters
It demonstrates Congress’s power to nullify agency rules under CRA, potentially shaping future federal risk-management approaches to TCE and setting a precedent for oversight of TSCA rulemakings.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
H.J.Res.34 uses the Congressional Review Act to disapprove the Environmental Protection Agency’s final rule on Trichloroethylene under TSCA. If Congress passes and the President signs the resolution, the rule is treated as though it never took effect.
The targeted rule—published December 17, 2024—would be nullified, and the EPA would not carry out the obligations that rule would have imposed. The bill does not lay out an alternative federal standard for TCE; it simply withdraws the EPA’s implementation of that specific rule.
Stakeholders include EPA staff, chemical manufacturers and users who would have faced new TSCA requirements, and industries seeking regulatory certainty. The broader significance is the reaffirmation of congressional oversight over agency rulemaking and the potential implications for how future TSCA-related regulations are approached and challenged.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill disapproves the EPA final TSCA rule on Trichloroethylene (TCE).
It uses the Congressional Review Act to nullify the rule’s force and effect.
The targeted rule is identified with 89 Fed. Reg. 102568 (Dec. 17, 2024).
It is a Joint Resolution introduced in the 119th Congress by Rep. Harshbarger and Rep. Miller-Meeks.
If enacted, the federal obligations from the rule do not take effect.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Congressional disapproval mechanism under CRA
This section codifies Congress’s disapproval of the EPA TSCA rule using the framework of the Congressional Review Act. It establishes the core mechanism by which a pending or final agency rule can be struck down by a joint resolution, preventing the rule from taking effect.
Rule identification and scope
This section identifies the specific rule being targeted—the EPA’s Trichloroethylene regulation under TSCA—and cross-references the Federal Register citation (89 Fed. Reg. 102568, December 17, 2024) to ensure precise scope of disapproval.
Effect of disapproval
This section states the operative consequence: the rule shall have no force or effect. It explicitly withdraws the regulatory obligations that would have flowed from the EPA rule, restoring no new federal requirements under that rule.
Procedural context
This section situates the measure within Congress’s authority to disapprove agency actions under CRA. It does not prescribe replacement rules or timelines beyond nullifying the targeted TSCA rule.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Environment across all five countries.
Explore Environment in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Chemical manufacturers and importers relying on TCE processes—benefit from reduced compliance risk and fewer federal obligations.
- Downstream users of TCE in manufacturing and cleaning operations—avoid potential regulatory costs and process changes.
- Industry trade associations representing chemical sector—advocates for regulatory relief and clearer compliance expectations.
- Public policy or business groups prioritizing regulatory certainty and cost containment—prefer a stable federal regulatory environment.
Who Bears the Cost
- Public health and environmental justice communities near TCE facilities—risk may be less regulated if the disapproved rule diminishes TSCA protections.
- States and local governments aligning with federal TSCA standards who may face regulatory mismatch or replication of rules.
- EPA and federal agencies responsible for TSCA enforcement—loss of federal oversight pathways during the rule’s disapproval may introduce uncertainty or delay in risk management.
- Workers in industries using TCE—potentially higher exposure risk if disapproval limits protective TSCA actions.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
Congress uses CRA disapproval to halt EPA action on TCE, but stopping this rule may leave regulatory gaps and create uncertainty about federal risk management of a hazardous chemical.
The bill leverages the CRA mechanism to nullify a specific EPA rule, signaling a strong legislative check on agency rulemaking. While the action achieves a clean disapproval of this TSCA rule, it raises questions about the continuity of environmental protections and the availability of a uniform federal standard for TCE.
Because CRA disapprovals are binary—approve the rule or strike it—the measure does not specify an alternative, which could leave a regulatory gap or shift risk management decisions to other authorities or states. The tension here is between congressional oversight and agile agency regulation in a rapidly evolving chemical risk landscape.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.