119-SJRES-60 Data-Driven Journalist Impact Analysis

Summary

S.J.Res. 60 seeks to disapprove EPA’s interim final rule (IFR) “Emissions Budget and Allowance Allocations for Indiana Under the Revised CSAPR Update” (90 FR 21423, May 20, 2025). The IFR increased Indiana’s CSAPR NOx ozone‑season budget and corresponding unit‑level allocations for 2024 and later years after several planned EGU retirements were deferred or canceled. Disapproval would restore the prior, lower budget and allocations. [1]Federal Register — Federal Register: Emissions Budget and Allowance Allocations…

• What changes: Indiana’s 2024+ budget would revert from 11,245 tons back to 9,564 tons (−1,681 tons), and related allocations would roll back accordingly. Region‑wide 2024 allowances would fall by the same amount. [1]Federal Register — Federal Register: Emissions Budget and Allowance Allocations…[2]U.S. EPA — EPA: State Budgets under the Revised CSAPR Update (table with 2021–2…
• Context: The IFR responded to superseded retirement plans at specific Indiana EGUs; EPA characterized the action as not a “major rule.” [1]Federal Register — Federal Register: Emissions Budget and Allowance Allocations…
• Status note: On September 16, 2025, a motion to proceed on S.J.Res. 60 was rejected in the Senate (47–51); analysis below evaluates potential impacts if enacted. [3]Library of Congress — Congress.gov: All Info for S.J.Res.60 (119th Congress)

Economic Effects

Evidence on costs and markets suggests limited near‑term price effects, with more meaningful risks tied to long‑run policy inflexibility.

• Compliance costs: A tighter Indiana cap (−1,681 tons vs IFR) would marginally increase demand for ozone‑season allowances and/or control operation in Indiana. EPA reports 2024 regional emissions at ~84,189 tons against ~155,525 allowances (with IFR), indicating substantial slack; removing 1,681 allowances would be a small percentage change, so immediate compliance cost impacts are likely limited. [4]Federal Register — Federal Register (same IFR): operative details & totals cite…
• Allowance prices and liquidity: NOx allowance markets have been unsettled amid litigation and program reshuffling, with Group 2 prices assessed around low triple‑digits to sub‑$1,000/st in 2024; a ~1% reduction in the 2024 regional pool is unlikely to move prices materially absent other shocks. [5]Argus Media — Argus Media: Viewpoint—Bearish year ahead for NOx markets (2024 p…
• Power prices: EPA deemed the IFR not significant for energy supply (EO 13211). Given ample regional allowance supply and trading flexibility, near‑term wholesale price effects from reverting Indiana’s budget are likely modest. [4]Federal Register — Federal Register (same IFR): operative details & totals cite…
• Indiana generation mix exposure: Indiana remains coal‑ and gas‑reliant, so marginal compliance adjustments would primarily affect fossil units; nonetheless, given banking and controls, unit dispatch rather than large capital changes is the likely short‑run margin. [6]U.S. Energy Information Administration — EIA: Indiana Electricity Profile (2023)
• Long‑run investment signals: If CRA disapproval bars EPA from issuing a substantially similar Indiana budget adjustment later, misalignment between actual fleet status and fixed budgets could increase compliance frictions and price volatility over time. [7]Congressional Research Service — CRS Report R43992: The Congressional Review Ac…[8]Congressional Research Service — CRS In Focus IF10023: The Congressional Review…

Social Effects

Public‑health evidence links ozone‑season NOx with smog formation and respiratory harms, with disproportionate impacts on vulnerable groups.

• Direction of effect: Compared with the IFR, disapproval would tighten Indiana’s ozone‑season NOx cap, plausibly reducing emissions at the margin and, directionally, population exposure to downwind ozone—though the absolute change is small relative to the regional bank. [4]Federal Register — Federal Register (same IFR): operative details & totals cite…
• Health burden context: EPA’s Good Neighbor Plan (GNP) finds that ozone‑season NOx reductions prevent premature deaths, hospital visits, asthma symptoms, school absences, and lost workdays, with benefits concentrated among children, older adults, and low‑income communities. While these benefits are quantified for larger multi‑state reductions, they indicate the sign of health effects from incremental cuts. [9]U.S. EPA — EPA News Release: Final “Good Neighbor” Plan—projected benefits and…[10]Web search · turn 12 #2
• Equity: Because ozone impacts often burden urban and downwind communities, incremental emission reductions tend to yield proportionally larger benefits for sensitive populations; however, the specific incremental benefits from a 1,681‑ton change are not separately quantified by EPA. [10]Web search · turn 12 #2

Environmental Effects

Net environmental changes hinge on emissions budgets and actual emissions under trading.

• Reversion effect: Disapproval would restore Indiana’s lower budget and earlier unit‑level allocations, modestly strengthening the cap relative to the IFR. [1]Federal Register — Federal Register: Emissions Budget and Allowance Allocations…[2]U.S. EPA — EPA: State Budgets under the Revised CSAPR Update (table with 2021–2…
• Regional signal: EPA notes total 2024 allowances (~155,525) exceeded reported emissions (~84,189), so environmental outcomes depend on how sources bank or use allowances; in expectation, a smaller pool reduces future‑season emissions flexibility at the margin. [4]Federal Register — Federal Register (same IFR): operative details & totals cite…
• Program context: The IFR operates under the Revised CSAPR Update framework; its adjustments were prompted by changed retirement plans at specific Indiana units, not by reopening broader program stringency. [1]Federal Register — Federal Register: Emissions Budget and Allowance Allocations…

Temporal Analysis

• Short term (2025–2026): Minimal wholesale market disruption expected given surplus allowances; slight downward pressure on Indiana EGU NOx versus the IFR path. Health and environmental effects are directionally beneficial but likely small in magnitude. [4]Federal Register — Federal Register (same IFR): operative details & totals cite…
• Medium to long term (2027+): CRA constraints may limit EPA’s ability to make similar, data‑driven corrections if plant retirements or utilization diverge from assumptions, increasing the odds of budget‑to‑fleet mismatch, local scarcity, or sharper price swings in certain seasons. [7]Congressional Research Service — CRS Report R43992: The Congressional Review Ac…[8]Congressional Research Service — CRS In Focus IF10023: The Congressional Review…
• Litigation backdrop: Ongoing litigation over the 2015 Ozone NAAQS Good Neighbor Plan and related stays create policy uncertainty that interacts with allowance banking and trading across programs. [11]Legal Information Institute — LII: Ohio v. EPA (Supreme Court bulletin summary…

Unintended Consequences

Assessment

Methodological notes: This assessment weighs scale (tons), market conditions (surplus, banking), and legal constraints (CRA). It does not advocate for an outcome.

• Economic: Near‑term impacts appear modest due to allowance surplus; long‑run rigidity risk is non‑trivial if retirement/operation assumptions continue to shift. [4]Federal Register — Federal Register (same IFR): operative details & totals cite…[7]Congressional Research Service — CRS Report R43992: The Congressional Review Ac…
• Social: Directionally favorable (slightly lower ozone‑season NOx vs IFR), but effect size is small relative to regional totals; benefits would accrue broadly to downwind populations. [9]U.S. EPA — EPA News Release: Final “Good Neighbor” Plan—projected benefits and…
• Environmental: Tightens Indiana’s cap relative to IFR, marginally reducing total allowances and future banking potential. [2]U.S. EPA — EPA: State Budgets under the Revised CSAPR Update (table with 2021–2…[4]Federal Register — Federal Register (same IFR): operative details & totals cite…
• Overall analytical stance: Neutral—small short‑run changes with offsetting long‑run risks tied to CRA inflexibility.

Sourcing

Primary sources and methods referenced above.

• EPA interim final rule (IFR) setting Indiana’s adjusted budgets/allocations and program context. [1]Federal Register — Federal Register: Emissions Budget and Allowance Allocations…
• EPA Revised CSAPR Update state budgets table (pre‑IFR baseline for Indiana). [2]U.S. EPA — EPA: State Budgets under the Revised CSAPR Update (table with 2021–2…
• Congress.gov bill record and summary for S.J.Res. 60. [13]Library of Congress — Congress.gov: S.J.Res.60 summary page[3]Library of Congress — Congress.gov: All Info for S.J.Res.60 (119th Congress)
• CRS primers on CRA scope and effects (“substantially the same” bar). [7]Congressional Research Service — CRS Report R43992: The Congressional Review Ac…[12]Congressional Research Service — CRS Report R46690: CRA Issues—Lookback Mechani…[8]Congressional Research Service — CRS In Focus IF10023: The Congressional Review…
• EPA Good Neighbor Plan results and benefit summaries (health context). [14]U.S. EPA — EPA: Good Neighbor Plan Results (program performance highlights)[9]U.S. EPA — EPA News Release: Final “Good Neighbor” Plan—projected benefits and…
• Argus Media market coverage of CSAPR NOx allowance pricing (market context). [5]Argus Media — Argus Media: Viewpoint—Bearish year ahead for NOx markets (2024 p…
• EIA Indiana electricity profile (fuel mix/exposure context). [6]U.S. Energy Information Administration — EIA: Indiana Electricity Profile (2023)
• Litigation backdrop summary for Ohio v. EPA (Good Neighbor Plan stay). [11]Legal Information Institute — LII: Ohio v. EPA (Supreme Court bulletin summary…