PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 3, 2025
This joint resolution nullifies the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule titled Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Withdrawal of Technical Amendment (90 Fed. Reg. 6811) and published on January 21, 2025. Among other elements, the rule reversed a final rule from November 2020 that removed the Air Nuisance Rule (ANR) from the Ohio State Implementation Plan (SIP). The EPA determined its original action to remove the ANR was in error, and this rule reinstates the ANR. (Under the Clean Air Act, states must submit SIPs to comply with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. This ANR was included in Ohio’s SIP.)
People & committees
Rep. Balderson, Troy [R-OH-12] · R–OH
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.J.Res.66 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.J.Res.66 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.J.Res.66 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.J.Res.66 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-03-03 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
This proposed resolution would cancel an Environmental Protection Agency rule concerning Ohio’s air plan. If enacted, it would make that specific rule legally ineffective.
That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Withdrawal of Technical Amendment (90 Fed. Reg. 6811 (January 21, 2025)), and such rule shall have no force or effect.
The resolution targets the rule titled “Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Withdrawal of Technical Amendment,” published on January 21, 2025, at page 6811 of volume 90 of the Federal Register, the federal government’s publication for rules and notices.
the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Withdrawal of Technical Amendment (90 Fed. Reg. 6811 (January 21, 2025))
The supplied action snapshot, updated December 5, 2025, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on March 3, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2025-12-05T21:30:08Z. 2025-03-03: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. 2025-03-03: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-03-03. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version; accompanying earmark disclosures or reports were not supplied.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow carve-out, special exemption, or preferential treatment was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version; the missing underlying rule limits assessment of who would benefit from its cancellation.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Dec 5, 2025. How PlainBill uses AI