News

Washington, D.C. — House Committee on Energy and Commerce Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Subcommittee Chair Buddy Carter (R-GA) sent a letter to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Michael Regan outlining concerns about how new California Air Resources Board (CARB) regulations could harm the rail sector.  Highlights from POLITICO’s Morning Transportation Newsletter, which covered the letter exclusively:   FIRST IN MT, NO TO CARB: Energy and Commerce Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) and Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Subcommittee Chair Buddy Carter (R-Ga.) are urging EPA Administrator Michael Regan to reject a California proposal to make particular trains running in the state follow more stringent emissions standards.   The lawmakers say the rule — approved last year by the California Air Resources Board and that would by 2030 restrict certain trains from operating in the state unless they are less than 23 years old or are zero emissions vehicles — would “lead to higher consumer prices, impair the country’s transportation system, and harm interstate commerce.”   KEY LETTER EXCERPTS   We write regarding the “In-use Locomotive Regulation” (hereinafter “the CARB regulation”) issued by the California Air Resources Board (CARB), which would force the premature retirement of reliable and affordable diesel locomotives and has the potential to upend our nation’s rail system and supply chains. CARB has made a request to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for a Federal authorization of the CARB regulation, which would impose zero-emissions requirements on locomotives. Given the interconnectedness and importance of rail service to our nation’s transportation and commerce systems, Congress has consistently found that railroads are to be regulated at the federal level. California’s requested authorization, if granted, would violate statutory authority, negatively impact States without the public policy goals of California, lead to higher consumer prices, impair the country’s transportation system, and harm interstate commerce.   [...]   Rail transportation makes up just 1.7 percent of transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions in the United States.19 Rather than seeking top-down, command and control policies, which will raise costs, hasten consolidation in the rail sector, and do little to reduce the overall emissions footprint of the globe, we urge you to reject California’s authorization request.   CLICK HERE to read the full letter to Administrator Regan. 

Washington D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Subcommittee Chair Buddy Carter (R-GA) sent a letter to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Michael Regan raising concern regarding the potential misuse of $600 million from the Department’s Environmental Justice Thriving Communities Grantmaking Program.  CLICK HERE to read exclusive coverage from the Daily Caller:  “Republican Reps. Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington and Buddy Carter of Georgia, two leading members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, wrote to Regan to request that his agency brief the committee about its $600 million Environmental Justice Thriving Communities Grantmaking Program. The lawmakers raised specific concerns about some of the organizations the agency selected as awardees for the program, to whom the agency is giving tens of millions of dollars to distribute to other organizations pursuing ‘environmental justice.’”   [...]   “The EPA announced the 11 awardees for the program in December 2023, giving ten organizations $50 million and $100 million to another to use to support other groups in the region advancing 'environmental justice,' a concept that has played a large role in the Biden EPA’s regulatory, grantmaking and enforcement agendas. 'Environmental justice' is effectively the by-product of climate policy and social justice ideology.   “The lawmakers expressed concerns that some of the recipients and partner organizations, including the Climate Justice Alliance and the Institute for Sustainable Communities, have previously spent money to advance a partisan energy agenda or worked with groups who have sued the government to block fossil fuel development.”   [...]   “The lawmakers concluded their letter to Regan by requesting that he and his agency brief the committee to explain how recipients were chosen, detail the agency’s oversight plans, explain whether the EPA intends to report the use of the funds to Congress and whether the agency will report the recipients of sub-grants.”   BACKGROUND:   Many of the EPA’s funding decisions suggest this program may be funneling potentially billions of taxpayer dollars to radical, far-left organizations whose mission is to protest, disrupt, and undercut U.S. energy production and leadership, while also freeing up funds to support their extreme activist agendas.  The EPA is awarding $50 million to the Institute for Sustainable Communities and the Climate Justice Alliance, both of which have a legacy of extreme anti-energy activism.  In the past, the Institute for Sustainable Communities and the Climate Justice Alliance have donated to groups carrying out illegal, violent protests to halt American energy projects.  Multiple Grantmakers tasked with disbursing program funds are not located in the EPA region they have been chosen to serve.  CLICK HERE to read the full letter. 

On the House Floor: H.R. 6192 to reform the Energy Policy Conservation Act The Biden administration is waging war on American energy, and this war is making its way into Americans’ homes. President Biden and Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary Granholm are sacrificing peoples’ ability to purchase affordable and reliable products for their homes in their pursuit of a radical rush-to-green agenda. Housing prices and utility bills are already too high for Americans, but that isn’t stopping the administration from continuing to impose burdensome regulations. Since taking office, the Biden administration has been attacking common and popular household appliances in the name of “energy efficiency.” In fact, last year the Biden administration proposed a ban on gas stoves as part of its war against fossil fuels. More recently, the DOE has announced plans to regulate washers, dryers, dishwashers, refrigerators, freezers, air conditioners, and more, which is forcing people to spend more for less reliable options. Even worse, these new regulations fail to accomplish their stated goals as they will NOT save a significant amount of energy and are NOT cost-effective. For example, the DOE’s own analysis finds that efficiency mandates on dishwashers could increase the upfront cost by 28% and it could take consumers 12 years to payback the increased costs on a product that may only last 7-12 years.    This comes at a time when Americans are already being crushed by rising costs thanks to Bidenflation. By continuing to double down on policies like these, the Biden administration is showing just how out of touch they are with the financial struggles the vast majority of Americans are feeling. In contrast, House Republicans are leading to protect Americans from federal mandates that result in minimal energy savings while significantly driving up costs. Today, the House will consider H.R. 6192, the Hands Off Our Home Appliances Act , led by Congresswoman Debbie Lesko (R-AZ), to preserve the affordability, availability, and quality of the household appliances Americans rely on every day. Here’s why H.R. 6192 is important: Enacted in 1975, the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) provides specific criteria the DOE must follow in order to propose a new appliance efficiency standard. The DOE may only propose a new standard if it results in a significant conservation of energy, is technologically feasible, and economically justified. The Biden administration has consistently ignored these critical consumer protections by proposing and finalizing standards that violate the statute. H.R. 6192 would prevent this abuse by: Eliminating unnecessary and duplicative rulemaking requirements  Authorizing the Secretary of Energy to amend or revoke a standard if it increases costs for consumers, does not result in significant energy or water savings, is not technologically feasible, or results in the unavailability of product  Protecting affordability by requiring the DOE to consider the cost to low-income households and the full-life cycle cost of appliances when determining if the new standard is economically justified  Establishing minimum thresholds for energy or water savings that must be achieved before imposing new standards  Prohibiting the Secretary of Energy from banning products based on what type of fuel that product uses (no natural gas bans)  Bottomline:  At a time when the American people are struggling under the crushing weight of Bidenflation, the last thing they need is more government mandates that drive up costs and fail to achieve their stated mission.

Washington D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Chair Buddy Carter (R-GA) delivered the following opening remarks at today’s subcommittee hearing titled “EPA’s RMP Rule: Failures to Protect the American People and American Manufacturing.”  EPA’S REGULATORY BLITZ   “The RMP rule will affect producers of critical materials necessary for an innovative and prosperous American economy.  “These include chemical manufacturers, petroleum refiners, drinking water and wastewater treatment professionals, agricultural chemical distributors, and other sectors which both make and provide a reliable supply of items necessary for improving lives, enhancing safety, and providing an affordable cost of living. “Unfortunately, this RMP rule appears to be another cog in EPA’s regulatory blitz; perpetuating inflation while making it harder to produce the materials and provide services Americans rely on. “Managing risk is a necessary practice for doing business in heavy industrial sectors. Owners and operators invest millions of dollars into their facilities to ensure they operate safely and at maximum efficiency with proper controls. “They have no interest — legally or financially — in becoming the face of industrial malpractice. “Despite this inherent incentive, the Biden EPA, fueled by its ideological allies’ quest for command and control, has flipped RMP on its head.” UNDERMINING AMERICAN MANUFACTURING “In taking this step, the Biden EPA is disregarding the purpose of the statute and pursuing a 'zero-risk' program. “Owners and operators of industrial facilities already operate under a General Duty Clause in both the Clean Air Act and under the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. “These provisions work to prevent and mitigate the consequences of accidents, as well as to furnish a workplace free from recognized hazards which may cause or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm. “In addition, the Clean Air Act clearly states, 'the administrator shall promulgate reasonable regulations and appropriate guidance to provide, to the greatest extent practicable, for the prevention and detection of accidental releases of regulated substances.’ “The recent RMP rule, though, goes far beyond what is reasonable and practicable for owners and operators of covered facilities.  “It is not reasonable for facilities to be required to disclose confidential information to anyone living, working, or spending an undefined, 'significant' amount of time within a 6-mile radius of a covered facility.  “In fact, it is a serious risk to our country’s security.  “These facilities handle hazardous materials which can be exploited by those seeking to harm Americans.  “Nor is it reasonable or practicable for certain chemical facilities and refineries to, in place of better training, be forced to prioritize installing new physical controls or measures on their facilities every five years or justify why they will not do so. And, being too expensive is not a justification.  “Under this new RMP rule, owners and operators of these facilities must prove their safety innocence to an EPA inspector every five years, regardless of the inspector’s technical proficiency regarding plant operations.”  UNREALISTIC NEW RULES “Risk management is a serious issue, we have a duty to ensure our constituents are protected from negligence and environmental hazards. “However, the pursuit of zero-risk is not reasonable, nor is it practicable. “Risk surrounds us every day. We drive cars to work, cross streets to get where we need to go, and take pharmaceuticals that may have potential side effects.  “Yet we responsibly manage these risks and reap the benefits of the opportunity they provide.  “The same goes for industrial production, we must responsibly manage risks to reap the benefits of the materials they provide. “Today, we will explore the RMP rule to learn how it could impair the ability of American businesses to compete in the global marketplace and provide items we all benefit from. “We also will hear from witnesses who are experts in the legal grounding of RMP, the field of risk management, and the hurdles businesses face when complying with burdensome regulations.”

Washington D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) delivered the following opening remarks at today’s Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Subcommittee hearing titled “EPA’s RMP Rule: Failures to Protect the American People and American Manufacturing.”  "The United States has long led the world in innovation and entrepreneurship, while continuing to maintain some of the highest environmental and labor standards in the world.  “This leadership has not been the result of a top-down, government-knows-best system.  “It’s the result of free market principles, and an entrepreneurial spirit that’s uniquely American.  “Our energy resources have enabled America to reduce emissions more than any other nation.  “This is a legacy we should be proud of and build off.  “Energy and Commerce Republicans have been working hard to do just that by advancing smart policies that protect and expand American leadership for generations to come.”  BIDEN’S RADICAL AGENDA   “The Biden administration, on the other hand, has been advancing policies that threaten this legacy.  “These actions are putting America on a dangerous path, they’re driving up inflation, killing manufacturing, and handing control of our future to China.  “The EPA has been at the center of this agenda.  “At a time when more than half the nation is at elevated risk of forced blackouts, the EPA has been finalizing new power plant rules that will shut down the types of electric generation needed to keep the lights on.  “Policies like their new PM2.5 standards will jeopardize manufacturing and jobs across the country.   “There are a hundred more examples of harmful policies and regulations like these coming out of President Biden’s EPA.  “When taken together these efforts will raise prices for Americans and open the door for China to replace American production and further pollute the environment.”  EPA’S RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (RMP) RULE   “Today, the Subcommittee will explore yet another one of these harmful regulations—the EPA rule that will massively expand Risk Management Plan (RMP) program requirements. “The truth is, everyone in this room wants American factories that operate responsibly and that ensure communities across the country are safe. “We also want those same communities to thrive and for people to have access to good, reliable jobs. “Under the RMP rules, we’ve seen a significant decrease in accidents over the last two decades. "EPA’s own data suggests that there was a 70 percent reduction in annual reported incidents between 2004 and 2020, and 97 percent of RMP-regulated facilities reported no accidents at all between 2016 and 2020.  “But this new RMP rule from the Biden EPA will force American manufacturers out of business or force them to move their operations overseas.  “If the rule itself wasn’t bad enough, President Biden’s EPA limited the comment period, preventing the public and the businesses impacted from being able to weigh in.  “Today we will pull the curtains back and learn more about the risks of this new rule.”  CONSEQUENCES OF THE RMP RULE   “The Clean Air Act requires RMP rules be ‘reasonable.’  “As we will discuss today, the EPA’s new rule fails to meet that simple requirement.  “Instead, this rule will raise gas prices for people across the country—which have already increased an average of 57 cents this year.   “According to AAA, gas prices have increased $1.25 nationwide since Biden took office. In my home state of Washington, the increase has been even greater.  “This new rule will only add to the pain Americans are already feeling at the pump, as we head into the peak summer travel season.  “The costs of essential goods and services will also rise as a result of the changes to RMP.  “It will harm small and medium sized refineries, who will be forced to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to comply.  “These impacted refineries account for 40 percent of existing and operating U.S. refining capacity. “Water utilities, manufacturers, agricultural retailers, pulp and paper producers, cold storage warehouses all could be forced to spend significant amounts of money to comply, or face shut down. “Instead of undermining American economic success, let’s work together to build on our remarkable legacy by embracing America’s tradition of balancing economic and environmental leadership, which will help lowers costs for Americans, create jobs, and prevent us from becoming reliant on China.”

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Subcommittee Chair Buddy Carter (R-GA) announced a hearing titled “EPA’s RMP Rule: Failures to Protect the American People and American Manufacturing.” “The EPA’s proposed RMP rule is expensive, over-the-top, and not rooted in reality. It is just the latest example of President Biden bending to radical environmentalists at the expense of America’s economic prosperity. Furthermore, the rule’s requirement that manufacturers publicly disclose their facilities’ vulnerabilities puts a target on their backs, opening them to attack and posing a serious security risk. We look forward to learning more from stakeholders next week about the negative impacts this poses for U.S. manufacturing and the American economy.” Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Subcommittee hearing titled “EPA’s RMP Rule: Failures to Protect the American People and American Manufacturing.” WHAT: A subcommittee hearing to discuss the Environmental Protection Agency’s harmful RMP rule. DATE: Tuesday, May 7, 2024 TIME: 10:30 AM ET LOCATION: 2322 Rayburn House Office Building This notice is at the direction of the Chair. The hearing will be open to the public and press and will be live streamed online at https://energycommerce.house.gov/ . If you have any questions concerning the hearing, please contact Kaitlyn Peterson at Kaitlyn.Peterson@mail.house.gov . If you have any press-related questions, please contact Sean Kelly at Sean.Kelly@mail.house.gov . 

E&C Republicans Are Holding Granholm Accountable for Her Radical Agenda Americans are suffering because the Biden administration’s energy crisis is increasing costs across the board. From the grocery store to the gas pump, President Biden and Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary Granholm’s continued actions to undermine American energy are driving up the cost of every purchase people make. To make life affordable again, the DOE must abandon its rush-to-green agenda. Ahead of Secretary Granholm’s appearance before the House Energy and Commerce Committee tomorrow, these are the top questions we have: With energy prices up across the board since President Biden took office, why won’t you commit to supporting the Lower Energy Costs Act ? Since day one in office, the Biden administration has worked to undermine America’s global leadership in clean, affordable, and reliable energy. For example, under Secretary Granholm’s leadership, the administration has: Drained the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) to the lowest level since 1983  Begged OPEC, Russia, and Venezuela to pump more oil while shutting down energy production here at home  Promoted an anti-fossil fuel agenda by stalling energy infrastructure projects  Blocked oil and gas development and production on federal lands and waters  Banned new liquified natural gas (LNG) export facility permits  Canceled critical mineral mining projects  Pressured banks and financial institutions to stop investing in fossil energy projects  Limited development of oil and gas resources in the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, set up by Congress for the nation’s energy security Additionally, the administration’s anti-American energy agenda has led them to undermine hydropower in the Pacific Northwest, implement an unworkable and overreaching Clean Power Plan 2.0 , and impose new particulate matter standards that crush American manufacturing. The list is long, but one thing is clear: each of these drastic measures raise costs for families and businesses, while stifling America’s energy and environmental leadership. H.R. 1, the Lower Energy Costs Act , would help regain energy dominance, lower prices, create jobs, reduce emissions, strengthen our national security, and secure our supply chains. Why are you forcing Americans to drive unaffordable electric vehicles? Americans don’t want the Biden administration’s aggressive EV mandates —they want to choose what vehicle best suits their needs. That’s exactly what nearly 5,000 American car dealers told President Biden—twice—after EVs stacked up on their lots. Just like Energy and Commerce Republicans, they’re demanding the Biden administration “hit the brakes” on its unrealistic agenda. This forced EV transition also plays right into China’s hands. China controls the vast majority of critical minerals mining, processing, and manufacturing for electric vehicles. Despite the consequences, the Biden administration continues to take actions that would require two thirds of all new vehicles be electric by 2032. In addition to forcing Americans to buy a more expensive vehicle, electricity prices are up 29% since President Biden took office. Simply put, Secretary Granholm’s EV mandates are driving up costs for Americans at a time when Biden’s energy crisis is already hurting every family. Why does the Biden administration repeatedly take action to increase home energy costs and worsen the housing affordability crisis ?   Housing prices and utility bills are already too high for Americans, but that hasn’t stopped President Biden and Secretary Granholm from continuing to impose burdensome regulations on homes and apartments. Starting with a ban on gas stoves, the Biden administration decided to start attacking common and popular household appliances in the name of “energy efficiency.” The DOE proceeded to then target washers, dryers, dishwashers, refrigerators, freezers, air conditioners, and more. Even more recently, the DOE imposed expensive, new energy codes that will only increase costs for Americans already struggling to get by. This rush-to-green agenda may appease President Biden’s radical political allies, but it does not help hardworking Americans—it just only exacerbates Biden’s energy crisis and the housing shortage Americans are facing. Why is the Biden administration undermining energy-producing communities, like Port Arthur, Texas , through their LNG export ban instead of unleashing clean, reliable, and affordable energy? Clean, affordable, and reliable American LNG is the lifeblood of many American communities. As America has become the number one producer and exporter of LNG in the world—despite President Biden's actions—we have strengthened our economy, lowered costs for families, and reduced emissions more than any other nation in the world.   Secretary Granholm’s claim that the administration’s de facto LNG export ban will only last a year proves it is nothing more than an election year stunt to win over the far-Left. Studies show that LNG exports could add upwards of 453,000 jobs and would provide a lifeline to our allies so they are not reliant on Russia for natural gas. President Biden and Secretary Granholm’s decision to halt LNG exports jeopardizes our economy, environment, and our national security.  Why did you secretly meet with the Chinese Communist Party’s top energy official just days before the Biden administration announced it would release oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve? Secretary Granholm had multiple conversations with the Chinese Communist Party’s top energy official just days before the Biden administration announced it would release oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) in 2021. By selling our strategic energy supplies to the CCP, the Biden administration is propping up China at the expense of American national and energy security. As a result, President Biden drained our emergency oil reserve to its lowest level in 40 years. That’s why Energy and Commerce led on H.R. 22 and H.R. 21 , both of which passed the House with bipartisan support, to prevent this abuse.

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Subcommittee Chair Buddy Carter (R-GA) released a statement following the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) announcement of several new rules impacting the power sector that will have devastating consequences for U.S. energy reliability. “The EPA’s rush to dismantle our nation’s baseload electricity generation will harm people’s lives and well-being. These policies undermine American energy security by forcing states to fundamentally change how they generate electricity. At a time when more than half the nation is at elevated risk of forced blackouts, the administration’s unrelenting rush-to-green agenda is shutting down the types of generation needed to keep the lights on and raising costs across the board. We should be strengthening and expanding reliable power generation to build on America’s legacy of energy security and leadership, rather than dismantling it.” BACKGROUND The Energy and Commerce Committee held hearings on June 6, 2023 and November 14, 2023 to discuss the harmful impact of the EPA’s Clean Power Plan 2.0 (CPP2.0) on America’s energy security and grid reliability.   On June 6, 2023, Chair Rodgers led a letter to EPA from all Energy and Commerce Republicans on the agency’s CPP2.0.  On July 31, 2023, Chair Rodgers and former Subcommittee on Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Chair Bill Johnson (R-OH) sent a letter calling on the EPA to extend the comment period for their new CPP2.0 proposal.  On November 7, 2023, Chair Rodgers, Subcommittee on Energy, Climate, and Grid Security Chair Jeff Duncan (R-SC), and former Subcommittee Chair Johnson sent a letter to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) on how new EPA regulations, including CPP2.0, would be detrimental to the U.S. electric grid.  On November 14, 2023, Chair Rodgers, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA), and former Subcommittee Chair Johnson sent a letter calling on EPA Administrator Michael Regan to withdraw the overreaching and unworkable CPP2.0 proposal. 

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) released the following statement after the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) earlier today announced a final rule designating Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluorooctanesulfonic Acid (PFOS) as “hazardous substances” under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). “This new rule falls woefully short of adequately addressing the legitimate and significant implementation and environmental questions raised by tens of thousands of stakeholders since this rulemaking process began. The agency’s decision to designate PFOA and PFOS as hazardous substances under CERCLA will have permanent, far-reaching implications for manufacturers, consumers, municipalities, landowners, and disposal companies. It will also have the effect of jeopardizing people’s access to essential services that we all rely on every single day. The reality is these and other efforts by the EPA are making life less affordable for Americans and jeopardizing America's economic leadership.”