Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to "Decabromodiphenyl Ether and Phenol, Isopropylated Phosphate (3:1); Revision to the Regulation of Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic Chemicals Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)".
Should HJR46 pass, it will effectively negate the EPA's recent rule revision, thereby impacting the regulatory landscape for hazardous chemicals. This may have significant implications for environmental protection policies and substance regulation. The disapproval of such EPA regulations could lead to concerns regarding the environmental and health safety standards associated with the chemicals in question, given their toxic classifications under existing law. This resolution reflects an ongoing debate about the role of federal regulations in environmental protection, especially regarding substances deemed hazardous to health and the environment.
HJR46 is a joint resolution aimed at disapproving a rule implemented by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concerning the regulation of Decabromodiphenyl Ether and Phenol, Isopropylated Phosphate (3:1). This rule pertains to the revision of persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic chemicals as categorized under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The resolution signals Congressional disapproval, indicating that the specified rule will have no force or effect if enacted. It was submitted by Mr. Clyde and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce on February 12, 2025.
The bill is likely to face contention among lawmakers, particularly those who advocate for stringent environmental protection measures and those who perceive such regulations as overreaching. Supporters of the resolution may argue that it provides necessary checks on federal regulations, while opponents may contend that it undermines critical environmental protections that safeguard public health and ecosystems. The debate may center on the balance between regulatory measures and industry interests, highlighting differing perspectives on the federal government's role in environmental oversight.