Home / Recent Bills / Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to "Phasedown of Hydrofluorocarbons: Management of Certain Hydrofluorocarbons and Substitutes Under the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act of 2020".
HOUSE · HJRES 38119 CONGRESS
Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to "Phasedown of Hydrofluorocarbons: Management of Certain Hydrofluorocarbons and Substitutes Under the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act of 2020".
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
H.J. Res. 38 is a joint resolution introduced in the 119th Congress that seeks to exercise congressional authority under the Congressional Review Act (CRA), specifically chapter 8 of title 5 of the United States Code, to disapprove and nullify a final rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The rule in question, published in the Federal Register on October 11, 2024 (89 Fed. Reg. 82682), implements the 'Phasedown of Hydrofluorocarbons: Management of Certain Hydrofluorocarbons and Substitutes' under the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act of 2020 (AIM Act). Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) are potent greenhouse gases used primarily in refrigeration, air conditioning, and foam blowing, with global warming potentials hundreds to thousands of times greater than carbon dioxide. The AIM Act, enacted in December 2020, mandates a phasedown of U.S. production and consumption of HFCs by 85% below baseline levels by 2036, aligning with the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol. The EPA's rule establishes an allowance allocation system for HFC production and consumption, sets forth rigorous reporting and recordkeeping requirements for industries handling HFCs and their substitutes, prohibits certain high-GWP HFCs in specific sectors, and promotes the adoption of lower-GWP alternatives. By passing this joint resolution, Congress intends to overturn the EPA's rule entirely, arguing that it overreaches agency authority, imposes undue economic burdens on businesses, and disrupts established industries without sufficient congressional oversight. If enacted, the resolution would have the full force of law, vacating the EPA's HFC management rule and preventing its implementation unless a substantially similar rule is later authorized by new legislation. This action reflects broader tensions over administrative agency power, climate policy direction, and the balance between environmental regulation and economic competitiveness.
Ask This Bill
Ask a specific question about this bill’s actual text — answers cite the section they come from.
+Could provide temporary relief for small businesses and rural communities concerned about the immediate costs of transitioning to new refrigeration and air conditioning systems, allowing more time for affordability and accessibility of alternatives.
+Highlights potential flaws in the EPA's implementation of the AIM Act, such as overly rigid timelines or insufficient flexibility for certain sectors, which could lead to improved regulatory design in future iterations.
+Emphasizes the importance of congressional oversight of agency rules, reinforcing democratic accountability even if the specific disapproval is not ultimately supported.
+May stimulate innovation and market competition by prompting a reevaluation of which HFC substitutes are most viable, safe, and cost-effective across different applications.
+Reflects legitimate federalism concerns by questioning whether a one-size-fits-all national approach adequately addresses regional variations in climate, industry needs, and infrastructure readiness.
MIGHT OPPOSE
−Directly conflicts with the Biden administration's climate goals and undermines U.S. efforts to meet international obligations under the Kigali Amendment, which the United States ratified in 2022.
−Would eliminate a carefully structured, industry-informed regulatory framework designed to phase down HFCs gradually while encouraging innovation in safer, more sustainable alternatives.
−Ignores the overwhelming scientific consensus on the necessity of reducing short-lived climate pollutants like HFCs to avoid dangerous tipping points in the climate system.
−Could result in increased greenhouse gas emissions, worsening air quality, and disproportionate environmental health impacts on frontline and environmental justice communities.
−Sets a dangerous precedent for using the CRA to overturn scientifically grounded environmental regulations, potentially weakening future agency actions on clean air, water, and public health protections.
Republicans
MIGHT SUPPORT
+Represents a check on executive branch overreach by asserting congressional authority to review and reject agency regulations, reinforcing the constitutional separation of powers.
+Protects American industries—particularly small and mid-sized manufacturers, HVAC contractors, and agricultural businesses—from potentially costly compliance obligations associated with HFC phasedown requirements.
+Avoids premature economic disruption by halting regulations that could increase costs for refrigeration, air conditioning, and foam production during periods of inflation and supply chain strain.
+Reflects skepticism toward international climate agreements like the Kigali Amendment, preserving U.S. regulatory sovereignty and preventing foreign influence on domestic environmental policy.
+Addresses concerns that the EPA's rule may have been developed without adequate input from affected stakeholders, ensuring that future regulations involve more transparent and inclusive rulemaking processes.
MIGHT OPPOSE
−Undermines a bipartisan law (the AIM Act of 2020) that was passed with Republican support and signed by President Trump, creating inconsistency in GOP environmental policy and appearing to reject a market-based approach to emissions reduction.
−Could harm U.S. competitiveness in global markets as other nations advance HFC phasedown efforts, potentially disadvantaging American companies that produce or wish to export climate-friendly technologies.
−Creates regulatory uncertainty for industries that have already begun investing in HFC alternatives and compliant technologies based on the expectation that the EPA rule would take effect.
−Neglects the significant climate benefits of reducing HFC emissions, which are among the most potent greenhouse gases, and foregoes a cost-effective opportunity to mitigate near-term warming.
−May provoke international criticism or diplomatic friction, as the United States risks being seen as reneging on its commitments under the Kigali Amendment, which enjoys broad global support.
![Rep. Dunn, Neal P. [R-FL-2]](https://www.congress.gov/img/member/115_rp_fl_2_dunn_neal_200.jpg)