Home / Recent Bills / Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Energy relating to "Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Consumer Gas-fired Instantaneous Water Heaters".
HOUSE · HJRES 20119 CONGRESS
Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Energy relating to "Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Consumer Gas-fired Instantaneous Water Heaters".
A joint resolution goes through the same process as a bill and carries the same legal
force once signed. One exception: a joint resolution proposing a constitutional
amendment is not presented to the President — it needs a two-thirds vote in
both chambers and then ratification by three-quarters of the states.
Bill vs. resolution, explained →
Summary
This joint resolution, H.J. Res. 20, seeks to disapprove a specific rule issued by the Department of Energy (DOE) under the Energy Conservation Program. The rule in question establishes new energy conservation standards for consumer gas-fired instantaneous water heaters, commonly known as tankless water heaters. Published in the Federal Register on December 26, 2024 (89 Fed. Reg. 105188), the rule sets minimum efficiency requirements that manufacturers must meet for these appliances sold in the United States. The resolution invokes the Congressional Review Act (CRA), specifically chapter 8 of title 5 of the United States Code, which allows Congress to overturn federal agency rules with a simple majority vote in both chambers and presidential signature (or veto override). By disapproving the rule, Congress aims to nullify it entirely, meaning the rule would have no legal force or effect, and the DOE could not reissue a substantially similar rule without new statutory authority. Proponents of the resolution argue that the DOE overstepped its authority, imposed unnecessary costs on consumers and manufacturers, and that market forces should determine efficiency standards rather than government mandates. Opponents contend that the resolution undermines efforts to improve energy efficiency, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and save consumers money on utility bills over the lifespan of the appliances. They also argue that the CRA process is being used for partisan purposes to block sensible environmental and consumer protections. If enacted, this resolution would prevent the new DOE standards from taking effect, maintaining the previous, less stringent standards for gas-fired tankless water heaters. The impact would be felt by consumers purchasing new water heaters (who might face higher operating costs), manufacturers (who would face regulatory uncertainty), and environmental advocates concerned about energy waste and emissions from residential water heating.
Ask This Bill
Ask a specific question about this bill’s actual text — answers cite the section they come from.
+None identified from a Democratic perspective, as the resolution opposes an energy efficiency rule that Democrats generally support.
MIGHT OPPOSE
−Blocks important energy efficiency standards that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions from residential water heating, contributing to climate change mitigation efforts.
−Increases long-term energy costs for consumers by preventing the adoption of more efficient appliances that save money on utility bills over time.
−Undermines the Department of Energy's statutory authority to set conservation standards under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act.
−Uses the Congressional Review Act for partisan purposes to overturn a scientifically justified rule rather than addressing genuine procedural or substantive flaws.
−Harms efforts to promote energy independence by maintaining higher energy consumption levels than necessary.
−Disadvantages low- and fixed-income households who benefit most from lower utility bills through efficient appliances.
−Sends a negative signal about the United States' commitment to energy efficiency and environmental protection.
Republicans
MIGHT SUPPORT
+Reduces regulatory burden on manufacturers, potentially lowering production costs and retail prices for gas-fired tankless water heaters.
+Prevents what Republicans view as government overreach by the Department of Energy, asserting that efficiency standards should be determined by the market, not federal mandates.
+Aligns with Republican principles of limited government intervention in the economy and skepticism of aggressive environmental regulations.
+Avoids potential increased upfront costs for consumers that could result from more efficient (but potentially more expensive) water heater models.
+Uses the Congressional Review Act as intended to check executive branch power and ensure congressional oversight of agency actions.
MIGHT OPPOSE
−Could lead to higher long-term energy costs for consumers who purchase less efficient water heaters, contradicting Republican support for consumer savings.
−May hinder innovation in energy-efficient appliance technology by removing incentives for manufacturers to improve.
−Contradicts traditional Republican support for energy independence, as less efficient appliances increase overall energy demand.
−Could be seen as prioritizing short-term industry interests over long-term environmental stewardship, a value many Republicans hold.
−Might result in regulatory instability if Congress frequently uses the CRA to overturn agency rules, creating uncertainty for businesses.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 221 - 198, 2 Present (Roll no. 53). (text: CR H884)
Feb 27, 2025
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 221 - 198, 2 Present (Roll no. 53). (text: CR H884)
Feb 27, 2025
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
Feb 27, 2025
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.J. Res. 20.
Feb 27, 2025
Rule provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 20, H.J. Res. 35 and H. Con. Res. 14. The resolution provides for consideration of two joint resolutions, H.J.Res.20, under a closed rule and H.J.Res. 35, under a closed rule. Also, the resolution provides for consideration of H. Con. Res. 14, under a closed rule. The joint resolutions are debated for one hour each and the concurrent resolution is debated for 3 hours.
Feb 27, 2025
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 161. (consideration: CR H884-889)
![Rep. Palmer, Gary J. [R-AL-6]](https://www.congress.gov/img/member/p000609_200.jpg)