Understanding SJRES86: A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States

SJRES86 is a proposal to cancel a specific rule made by the EPA. This rule approved South Dakota's plan to manage regional haze, which is a type of air pollution that makes it hard to see clearly in national parks and wilderness areas. The bill uses a special law called the Congressional Review Act to stop this rule from being enforced. If the bill passes, it would mean that the EPA's approval of South Dakota's plan is no longer valid. This would stop the plan from being put into action. The EPA would not be able to approve the same plan again unless Congress decides to allow it. This is important because South Dakota's plan didn't require any new pollution controls on its biggest sources of haze, like coal and cement plants. The bill aims to ensure that South Dakota's plan is strong enough to actually improve visibility in places like Badlands National Park. It would force the state to come up with a new plan that includes better pollution controls, or the federal government might step in to create a plan instead.

This bill is important because it affects the air quality and visibility in national parks that millions of people visit each year. If the air is cleaner, visitors can enjoy clearer views and healthier air. This is not just about enjoying nature; it's also about protecting public health. Cleaner air means fewer health problems for people who live downwind of pollution sources. For businesses in South Dakota, this bill could mean changes. If the current plan is canceled, industries like coal and cement might have to install new pollution controls, which could be costly. However, it could also mean better air quality for everyone, including those living in other states who are affected by pollution that travels through the air.

- Stronger Pollution Controls: Supporters say the bill will force South Dakota to add better pollution controls to its biggest haze-causing plants, which is necessary for cleaner air. - Public Health Protection: By rejecting the current plan, the bill aims to reduce harmful emissions that can affect people's health, especially those living downwind. - Upholding the Clean Air Act: The bill ensures that the Clean Air Act's requirements for improving air quality are followed, promoting fairness among states. - Preserving Park Visibility: It helps protect the natural beauty of national parks by ensuring plans make real progress toward clearer skies. - Encouraging Accountability: The bill prevents states from ignoring pollution problems that affect other regions.

- Regulatory Uncertainty: Opponents argue that canceling the plan creates uncertainty for businesses, which could delay operations and increase costs. - Lack of Immediate Benefits: They point out that stopping the current plan doesn't immediately reduce pollution, as a new plan needs to be developed. - Potential Federal Intervention: Critics worry that without a state plan, the federal government might impose a one-size-fits-all solution that doesn't consider local needs. - Economic Impact: Industries might face financial challenges as they wait for a new plan to be approved, affecting jobs and investments. - Process Concerns: Some believe the bill disrupts the established process for state planning without providing a clear alternative.