News

Environment, Manufacturing, & Critical Materials Updates


May 16, 2024
Press Release

Bicameral Republican Committee Leaders Press Secretary Blinken for Clarity on Climate Policy Leadership Structure

Washington, D.C. — In a new letter, House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Michael McCaul (R-TX), Senate Foreign Relations Committee Ranking Member Jim Risch (R-ID), and Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Ranking Member Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) are pressing Secretary of State Antony Blinken to clarify the leadership structure of the Biden administration as it sets climate policy on the international stage.  BACKGROUND :  In January 2024, the White House announced that Secretary John Kerry would be leaving the Special Presidential Envoy for Climate (SPEC) role and that John Podesta would “continue to lead […] global climate efforts” by assuming the role of Senior Advisor to the President for International Climate Policy  Rather than nominate Mr. Podesta to the SPEC role, which would require confirmation with the advice and consent of the Senate under legislation signed into law in 2021, President Biden appointed Mr. Podesta to a new position based in the White House that appears to have striking similarities to the SPEC role previously held by Secretary Kerry.  As the Republican leaders of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee described in a March 5, 2024, letter to President Biden, the administration appears to be deliberately evading congressional oversight of its international climate policy by appointing Mr. Podesta to an advisory position in the White House.  The response from the White House Counsel’s office to the Committees stated, “On January 31, 2024, the White House announced President Biden’s appointment of Mr. Podesta to serve as Senior Advisor to the President for International Climate Policy. Mr. Podesta now leads interagency coordination of the Administration’s international climate policy agenda.”  It also stated, “Mr. Podesta’s role is not a replacement for SPEC, and the State Department will continue to lead international climate diplomacy, including negotiations, for the United States.”  Despite the White House’s assertion that Mr. Podesta would coordinate “interagency” efforts, he has met with foreign leaders on at least two occasions since assuming his new position.  KEY EXCERPT :  “Mr. Podesta’s coordination with the SPEC office and international representation of the United States in meetings with foreign leaders to discuss international climate policy appear to far exceed the characterization of Mr. Podesta’s role in the initial response to the Committees as merely leading ‘interagency coordination’ for the administration’s international climate policy.  “In light of this apparent overlap of duties between what Secretary Kerry undertook as the SPEC and what Mr. Podesta is now undertaking as a ‘Senior Advisor,’ we request information on the roles and responsibilities of the SPEC and the Senior Advisor to the President for International Climate Policy, as well as information on ongoing or planned coordination between these two entities.”  CLICK HERE to read the full letter. 



May 15, 2024
Hearings

Subcommittee Chair Carter Opening Remarks at Hearing on EPA’s Budget

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 “The Fiscal Year 2025 Environmental Protection Agency Budget.” RUSH-TO-GREEN AGENDA IS DESTROYING AMERICAN MANUFACTURING   “I recently assumed the gavel of this subcommittee and am privileged to be able to lead this panel’s important work to advance policies which provide for environmental protection while also growing our manufacturing and industrial base.  “My district in southeast Georgia features over 100 miles of pristine coastline, the Okefenokee Swamp, and thriving forestlands.  “These are resources we cherish and strive to protect for future generations.  “We are also one of the fastest growing economies in the country.  “Billions of dollars of investment are flowing to my district, fueled by Georgia’s pro-business policies, low-electricity rates, and access to the Ports of Savannah and Brunswick.  “To the detriment of my district and the stated goals of this administration, the EPA’s regulatory agenda is poised to choke the prospects for increased prosperity.  “The recently finalized Particulate Matter—PM2.5—standard will gridlock permitting at new and expanded manufacturing facilities.  “By placing the standard so close to the natural background level, studies indicate that nearly 80 percent of manufacturing projects would fail to obtain a permit, including the $5.5 billion Hyundai EV battery plant in my district.  “Luckily, this investment received its permit before the standard was revised.  “China controls over seventy-five percent of the EV battery supply chain and actions like the PM2.5 standard threaten to tighten their chokehold on battery manufacturing.  “Meanwhile, the EPA, in its zealous rush to green agenda, has mandated that almost 70 percent of new passenger vehicles sold by 2032 be electric.  “I am not anti-EV. I believe there is a market for EVs, and we should be building up our entire supply chain, including in Georgia, to reduce reliance on China.  “However, I am anti-mandate. The EPA’s EV mandate reduces consumer choice, and its efforts to limit new critical mineral refining ties us to China and threatens grid reliability.”  EPA’S ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL APPROACH DOESN’T WORK   “While the administration pushes grandiose electrification visions, the EPA seems to have forgotten that electricity does not come from the plug.  “The illegal Clean Power Plan 2.0 threatens to shutter 16 percent of our reliable, baseload generation that comes from coal-fired power—stranding assets, raising rates, and increasing blackouts.  “Section 111 of the Clean Air Act requires the 'best system of emission reduction' to be ‘adequately demonstrated.’  “By mandating that states require coal-fired plants with a useful life beyond 2039 achieve 90 percent carbon capture by 2032, the EPA overstepped its authority and will land itself back in crosshairs of the Courts.  “No coal-fired power plant in North America has achieved a 90 percent capture rate. There are no projects to demonstrate this even close to deployment. Guesswork is not a basis for telling states what standards to set.  “The EPA does not even have a history of timely permitting the injection wells necessary for carbon sequestration.  “I note, two states EPA has finally allowed to do this have permitted more injection sites in just two years than the EPA has in a decade—not a sign that EPA is serious about relying on this technology.”  IMPORTANCE OF WORKING WITH STATE REGULATORS   “I am surprised, that since you are a former State regulator, the administration has not more effectively leveraged your experience and relationships with your co-regulators, the States.  “Unfortunately, a much different relationship has been fostered and it is my view that the agency has drifted far from the statutory principle of cooperative federalism. “Last year’s Interstate Transport Rule underscores this sad situation. “In the rule, the EPA denied 21 State Implementation Plans for ozone standards and less than one month later, the agency imposed Federal Implementation Plans on 23 states, nearly half of the country. “Now, the agency finds itself again in the Supreme Court. Something that could have been avoided if the agency had worked with its co-regulators. “Today, we will explore these regulatory topics, as well as the agency’s activities with its massive infusion of funding from the IRA. “It is imperative that Congress conducts robust oversight of the more than $41.5 billion given to EPA in the IRA, including the $31 billion in taxpayer funds the EPA was provided for its green bank and environmental justice block grant programs.”



May 15, 2024
Press Release

Chair Rodgers Opening Remarks at Hearing on EPA’s Budget

Washington D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) delivered the following opening remarks at today’s Subcommittee on Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials hearing titled “The Fiscal Year 2025 Environmental Protection Agency Budget.”  “Today we will discuss the President’s budget and priorities for the Environmental Protection Agency. “This committee plays a critical role in ensuring U.S. energy and economic security and leadership. “For decades, America has led the world in innovation and entrepreneurship, while continuing to maintain some of the highest environmental standards in the world. “We should be proud of this legacy and work together to advance smart policies that continue to build that legacy for generations to come.” ENABLING A RADICAL AGENDA “But sadly, the Biden administration and congressional Democrats are working to dismantle that legacy. “Their spending and regulatory policies continue to put America on a dangerous path that threatens our economic and energy security, while enriching our adversaries, like China, and making us beholden to them for critical materials. “The Biden administration and its allies have done this in ways that lack transparency and prevent accountability for their actions that threaten the American manufacturing and energy resources. “This is not acceptable in a free and democratic society. “Since President Biden took office, the EPA has been given $109 billion in additional funding and grown its workforce to over 15,000 employees. “President Biden’s budget request for Fiscal Year 2025, contains almost $11 billion in new funding requests for EPA—an increase of more than 8 percent from the current year. “This is 16.3 percent more than when the Biden administration came into office. “His proposed budget also calls for more than 2,000 new employees—a 12 percent increase over this fiscal year and almost 20 percent—or a one fifth increase in EPA bureaucrats since taking office, all to accelerate his radical rush-to-green agenda.” HARMFUL TO AMERICANS “Americans are already feeling the impacts of this agenda. “Since the Biden administration took office, electricity prices have risen 30 percent. “That's 50 percent more than the overall pace of inflation. “Unilateral actions like those taken by the administration continue to drive out affordable, reliable baseload generation needed to keep energy prices low and the lights on. “Grid operators and others have been sounding the alarm for years, warning that the U.S. is on a dangerous and unsustainable path. “Continuing this trend will mean higher prices and what the grid experts have warned the committee about: catastrophic blackouts. “In addition, the auto waivers for California and other allied states, as well as the federal mandates on car makers, are taking away affordable and practical transportation from Americans. “Ask any car dealer. “Their lots are full of EVs that won’t sell, and they have limited access to the vehicle models people actually want.” EPA IS COMPLICIT IN ECONOMIC HARM “The Biden administration’s regulatory machine has finalized 125 rules resulting in over one TRILLION dollars of new regulatory costs on American businesses. “These are costs that eventually will fall on the American people. “EPA rules are a critical part of the Biden agenda, and the agency’s policies, like the new PM2.5 standards, will make permitting for new manufacturing and development nearly impossible across the country. “We want to understand why EPA thinks the U.S. will be able to maintain economic leadership with these anti-manufacturing, anti-American policies, all of which enrich and make us more reliant upon China. “If we are serious about growing our economy and not China’s, we need a predictable and realistic regulatory environment, we need EPA to actually meet statutory deadlines for new chemical reviews, and we need data driven decisions that appropriately balance a healthy environment with a healthy economy. “EPA must return to its core mission, which does not include undermining the economic prosperity of the United States or driving costs up across the board for Americans.” 



May 14, 2024
Letter

E&C Republican Leaders Press Biden EPA for Answers About Grants Awarded to Political Allies

Washington, D.C. — In a new letter to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Michael Reagan, House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA), and Subcommittee on Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Chair Buddy Carter (R-GA), on behalf of the Oversight and Environment Subcommittee Republicans, are pressing for answers about the recently-awarded Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) grants.  KEY LETTER EXCERPTS :  “As you know, the Committee has questioned how the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) planned to distribute the $20 billion available to selected recipients under the new GGRF program, including the $14 billion for the National Clean Investment Fund (NCIF). Specifically, the Committee cited warnings that the EPA could use these large awards to subsidize favored organizations. At a January 30, 2024, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations hearing, Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers highlighted examples of former Biden administration officials and Democratic campaign staff in leadership roles of organizations vying for NCIF funding. Predictably, the EPA’s April 4, 2024, announcement of NCIF recipients confirmed our fears that this program would funnel taxpayer dollars to political allies.” [...] “Other individuals with ties to Democratic politics also lead organizations partnering with these recipients. While the EPA insists it had ethics rules and a fair competition policy in place, doling out billions of dollars to organizations led by politically connected individuals undermines public trust in the legitimacy of the federal financial awards process. It also furthers the concern that this program was created as an excuse to hand out funding to political allies.” The Chairs cited more than a dozen examples of politically connected leaders of organizations to which EPA plans to distribute billions of taxpayer dollars, and have requested a list of all of the nearly two dozen stakeholder meetings the EPA held in designing the program, including the dates, names of the individuals and organizations participating as well as any related minutes or memoranda by May 28, 2024. CLICK HERE to read the full letter. 



Chairs Rodgers and Carter Demand EPA Reject California’s CARB Authorization Request

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. 



E&C Republicans Pressure EPA Over Potentially Awarding $600 Million to Left-Wing Groups for “Environmental Justice”

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. 



May 7, 2024
Blog

Combatting President Biden’s Attack on Consumers' Freedom

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.



May 7, 2024
Hearings

Subcommittee Chair Carter Opening Remarks at Hearing on EPA’s Harmful RMP Rule

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.”



May 7, 2024
Hearings

Chair Rodgers Opening Remarks at Hearing on EPA’s Harmful RMP Rule

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.”