EPA Carbon-Pollution Standards Repeal Reaches House Committee

WASHINGTON — The Environmental Protection Agency has sent Congress a major final rule described as a partial repeal of carbon-pollution standards for fossil-fuel-fired electric generating units. The House received the communication Sept. 16 and referred it to the Energy and Commerce Committee under the Congressional Review Act reporting process. 1

The rule matters because it is an executive-branch change involving federal pollution standards for power plants that use fossil fuels. The Congressional Record identifies the action as a “Major final rule — Partial Repeal of the Carbon Pollution Standards for Fossil Fuel-Fired Electric Generating Units.”

The referral is a procedural step, not a House decision on the rule. The Record shows that the communication was taken from the Speaker’s table and sent to the Energy and Commerce Committee. It does not show the House voting that day to approve, reject or otherwise block the EPA rule. 1

The Congressional Review Act is a law that requires agencies to submit certain rules to Congress. It gives Congress a process to consider a resolution disapproving a rule, but committee referral alone does not settle whether Congress will act.

Supporters of a repeal may argue that reducing regulatory requirements could lessen operating costs and compliance burdens for power companies and help preserve power-system reliability. Opponents may argue that weaker carbon-pollution standards could have emissions, public-health and climate consequences. They may also emphasize the value of predictable rules for companies making long-term energy investments.

In separate House remarks, Rep. Katherine M. Clark, D-Mass., described a Massachusetts science town hall she joined with the Union of Concerned Scientists and more than 300 constituents. Clark criticized what she called the Trump administration’s “continued, devastating attacks on science,” including what she described as decisions to “cut research funding, politicize federal grantmaking, and destroy the institutions responsible for driving American innovation.” She said, “The cost of this war on science is nothing less than our global competitiveness, our environment, our health, and ultimately our lives.” 2

Clark’s remarks addressed the administration’s broader science and research policies rather than the EPA rule’s specific provisions. The next congressional questions are whether the Energy and Commerce Committee will examine the rule and whether lawmakers will use the Congressional Review Act process to pursue further action.