PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 10, 2025
This joint resolution nullifies the Environmental Protection Agency rule titled Updates to New Chemicals Regulations Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) (89 Fed. Reg. 102773) and published on December 18, 2024. Among other elements, the rule amends the new chemicals procedural regulations and also makes per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and other persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic chemicals (PBTs) ineligible for certain exemptions under the Toxic Substance Control Act.
People & committees
Rep. Higgins, Clay [R-LA-3] · R–LA
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jun 17, 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.76 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.76 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.76 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.76 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 · 2025-03-10 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 resolution proposes to cancel an Environmental Protection Agency rule updating regulations for new chemicals under the Toxic Substances Control Act. If enacted, it would make that rule legally ineffective.
That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to Updates to New Chemicals Regulations Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) (89 Fed. Reg. 102773 (December 18, 2024)), and such rule shall have no force or effect.
The proposal targets the specific rule published on December 18, 2024, at page 102773 of volume 89 of the Federal Register. It would disapprove that rule and give it no legal force or effect.
That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to Updates to New Chemicals Regulations Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) (89 Fed. Reg. 102773 (December 18, 2024)), and such rule shall have no force or effect.
The supplied June 17, 2025 source snapshot records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on March 10, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2025-06-17T16:03:35Z. 2025-03-10: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. 2025-03-10: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-03-10. 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 or policy change attached to appropriations was identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion applies only 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 for particular recipients or places was identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion applies only to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
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 after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion applies only to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials. The underlying rule is not supplied.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Jun 17, 2025. How PlainBill uses AI