Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
This bill amends Section 309 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7609) to change how the EPA reviews certain federal actions.
It inserts language about the Administrator providing written comments and clarifies or adds categories of matters subject to review, including newly authorized federal construction projects, major federal agency actions covered by NEPA, and proposed regulations published by federal departments or agencies.
The amendment also removes or replaces limited language in subsection (b).
Narrow, low-cost administrative tweak improves chances, but subject-matter sensitivity and lack of compromise features reduce certainty.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill aims to effect a substantive change to EPA review authorities by amending Clean Air Act section 309, but the provided text is incomplete and contains malformed insertions/strikes that obscure the precise changes. The statutory amendment approach is appropriate, but the execution details, fiscal acknowledgement, and oversight mechanisms are minimal or absent.
Whether bill actually weakens or strengthens EPA oversight is disputed.
Whether bill actually weakens or strengthens EPA oversight is disputed.
Likely skeptical.
The bill’s title frames deregulation, and the text is ambiguous about whether it actually strengthens EPA oversight or reduces regulatory protections.
Progressives would want assurance it will not weaken air-quality protections or limit EPA’s ability to review and object to harmful federal actions.
Pragmatic caution.
Centrist observers will note potential transparency gains from required written comments, but worry about ambiguity, administrative cost, and unintended delays or gaps in authority.
They would seek clarifying amendments and cost estimates before endorsing it.
Generally favorable.
The bill’s title and purpose align with reducing redundant regulation.
Conservatives will welcome efforts to identify duplicative rules and to formalize EPA comments that could be used to argue consolidation or repeal of overlapping requirements.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow, low-cost administrative tweak improves chances, but subject-matter sensitivity and lack of compromise features reduce certainty.
On Passage
On Motion to Recommit
Whether bill actually weakens or strengthens EPA oversight is disputed.
Narrow, low-cost administrative tweak improves chances, but subject-matter sensitivity and lack of compromise features reduce certainty.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill aims to effect a substantive change to EPA review authorities by amending Clean Air Act section 309, but the provided text is incomplete and contains malformed insert…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.