[House Report 118-26]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


118th Congress   }                                          {   Report
                         HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session     }                                          {   118-26

======================================================================


 
TO REPEAL SECTION 134 OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT, RELATING TO THE GREENHOUSE 
                           GAS REDUCTION FUND

                                _______
                                

 March 23, 2023.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

Mrs. Rodgers of Washington, from the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                             MINORITY VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 1023]

    The Committee on Energy and Commerce, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 1023) to repeal section 134 of the Clean Air 
Act, relating to the greenhouse gas reduction fund, having 
considered the same, reports favorably thereon without 
amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Purpose and Summary..............................................     2
Background and Need for Legislation..............................     2
Committee Action.................................................     3
Committee Votes..................................................     4
Oversight Findings and Recommendations...........................     7
New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures     7
Congressional Budget Office Estimate.............................     7
Federal Mandates Statement.......................................     7
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives............     7
Duplication of Federal Programs..................................     7
Related Committee and Subcommittee Hearings......................     7
Committee Cost Estimate..........................................     8
Earmark, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff Benefits.......     8
Advisory Committee Statement.....................................     8
Applicability to Legislative Branch..............................     8
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation...................     8
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............     8
Minority Views...................................................     9

39-006

                          PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

    H.R. 1023, a bill to repeal section 134 of the Clean Air 
Act, relating to the greenhouse gas reduction fund, was 
introduced by Rep. Gary J. Palmer (R-AL) on February 14, 2023. 
H.R. 1023 repeals the $27 billion program established in the 
Clean Air Act to make grants for the purposes of providing 
financial assistance to reduce the risk for banks to finance 
the rapid deployment of low- and zero-emission energy projects, 
such as community and rooftop solar installations.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    The Inflation Reduction Act (P.L. 117-169) added Section 
134, establishing a greenhouse gas reduction fund within the 
Clean Air Act. This new provision, unexamined in any 
legislative hearing by the Committee prior to enactment, 
differed substantially from previous national climate bank and 
green bank proposals in Committee legislative hearings, 
including during the 117th Congress. Those earlier provisions, 
proposed to be set up through the Department of Energy, 
included modest efforts to establish oversight of the grants, 
Inspector General Review, and other provisions to establish and 
oversee a proposed new ``climate,'' or ``green,'' bank 
infrastructure, which would receive the taxpayer subsidies, and 
keep any proceeds.\1\ Here, the same seed money to support 
development of a green banking infrastructure is provided 
directly to the EPA Administrator, with none of the oversight 
features of previous legislation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\See, for example, the 10-page provisions establishing a climate 
accelerator in Section 33004 of the LIFT Act; the 26-page H.R. 806 in 
the 117th Congress, establishing ``a clean energy and sustainability 
accelerator''; or the almost identical previous version, a 25-page H.R. 
5416 in the 116th Congress, establishing a National Climate Bank. By 
contrast, the green banking provisions in the reconciliation package, 
and the Inflation Reduction Act here amounted to four- and one-half 
pages.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Under Section 134, EPA is to issue $27 billion in grants by 
September 30, 2024, for the purpose of providing various forms 
of financing to support expansion of rooftop and community 
solar and other greenhouse gas reduction activities determined 
by the Administrator, with a priority on projects that 
otherwise would not receive financing.
    The central goal is to leverage financial institution 
investment to pursue local solar development and related 
projects--projects already covered by funding in other programs 
Congress has enacted or by funding provided by the private 
sector seeking to support renewable and zero-emission projects. 
A case in point is the now failed Silicon Valley Bank, which 
provided substantial financing for community solar development, 
participating in more than 60 percent of community solar 
financing deals.\2\ The grants provided in Section 134, through 
non-profit entities set up to manage the funding, provide 
private investors seed money to de-risk their own investments. 
The eligible recipients keep all the proceeds of any successful 
investments and financing programs so the recipients can 
operate these entities perpetually, far beyond any control by 
the Inspector General or Congress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\See ``Bank's implosion puts climate tech companies on edge,'' by 
Corbin Hiar and Avery Ellfeldt, PolticoPro, March 14, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The climate bank goals and decisions of the Administrator 
and grant recipients may conflict with the interests of 
ratepayers and taxpayers who are supporters of clean fossil 
energy, which are not eligible for financing. Senate testimony 
from Texas and Wyoming experts\3\ indicted a national climate 
bank's focus on renewable energy and ``transition'' away from 
fossil energy conflicts with state taxpayer interests--and the 
benefits of their resources for prosperity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\See Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works 
Subcommittee on Clean Air, Climate, and Nuclear Safety hearing 
entitled, ``Legislative Hearing on S. 283, National Climate Bank Act,'' 
April 27, 2021. Testimony by the Honorable Rusty Bell, Commissioner, 
Campbell County, Wyoming, and by Jason Isaac, Director Life: Powered, a 
project of the Texas Public Policy Foundation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Even representatives of minority communities have raised 
questions about subsidies for renewable energy and other 
electrification projects. Donna Jackson, Director of Membership 
Development, National Center for Policy Research, Project 21 
testified to the Committee that: ``The problem with minority 
communities is that they don't own their homes. What they want 
is homeownership, and we have climate policies that restrict 
that because it makes the building materials and the cost of 
building new homes so expensive that the price creates 
artificial scarcity and pushes them out of the marketplace. . . 
. Subsidies for solar panels benefits who? The landlords who 
own those homes. We are renters, the majority of us, and 
creating higher energy costs is increasingly keeping us out of 
homeownership.''\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\See Testimony of Donna Jackson, Donna Jackson, Director of 
Membership Development, National Center for Policy Research, Project 
21, at the before Committee on Energy and Commerce hearing entitled 
``American Energy Expansion: Strengthening Economic, Environmental, and 
National Security,'' January 31, 2023. (energycommerce.house.gov)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Committee finds that H.R. 1023 will repeal section 134 
of the Clean Air Act, a $27 billion program through which the 
EPA serves as conduit for grants to establish a green bank 
infrastructure that will pursue financing with limited 
oversight and will conflict with taxpayer interests.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    On February 7, 2023, the Subcommittees on Energy, Climate, 
and Grid Security and Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical 
Materials held a joint legislative hearing entitled, 
``Unleashing American Energy, Lowering Energy Costs, and 
Strengthening Supply Chains,'' on 17 pieces of legislation, 
including H.R. 1023. The Subcommittees received testimony from:
           The Honorable Mark Menezes, Former United 
        States Deputy Secretary of Energy, Department of 
        Energy;
           The Honorable Bernard McNamee, Former 
        Commissioner, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission;
           Jeffrey Eshelman, II, President and Chief 
        Executive Officer, Independent Petroleum Association of 
        America;
           Katie Sweeney, Executive Vice President and 
        Chief Operating Officer, National Mining Association;
           Raul Garcia, Legislative Director for 
        Healthy Communities, Earthjustice; and
           Tyson Slocum, Director of the Energy 
        Program, Public Citizen.
    On February 28, 2023, the Subcommittee on Environment, 
Manufacturing, and Critical Materials met in open markup 
session and forwarded H.R. 1023, without amendment, to the full 
Committee by a record vote of 11 yeas and 6 nays. On March 9, 
2023, the full Committee on Energy and Commerce met in open 
markup session and ordered H.R. 1023 favorably reported, 
without amendment, to the House by a record vote of 27 yeas and 
21 nays.

                            COMMITTEE VOTES

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

    Pursuant to clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of 
rule XIII, the Committee held hearings and made findings that 
are reflected in this report.

   NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY, ENTITLEMENT AUTHORITY, AND TAX EXPENDITURES

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII, the Committee 
finds that H.R. 1023 would result in no new or increased budget 
authority, entitlement authority, or tax expenditures or 
revenues.

                  CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII, at the time this 
report was filed, the cost estimate prepared by the Director of 
the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 was not available.

                       FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT

    The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal 
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act.

         STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general 
performance goal or objective of this legislation is to 
increase American energy production and restore energy 
leadership by repealing Section 134 of the Clean Air Act.

                    DUPLICATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(5) of rule XIII, no provision of 
H.R. 1023 is known to be duplicative of another Federal 
program, including any program that was included in a report to 
Congress pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139 or the 
most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance.

              RELATED COMMITTEE AND SUBCOMMITTEE HEARINGS

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(6) of rule XIII,
    (1) the following hearings were used to develop or consider 
H.R. 1141:
    On January 31, 2023, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
held an oversight hearing, entitled: ``American Energy 
Expansion: Strengthening Economic, Environmental, and National 
Security''. The Committee received testimony from:
           The Honorable Paul Dabbar, Former U.S. 
        Undersecretary of Energy, Department of Energy;
           Donna Jackson, Director of Membership 
        Development, National Center for Public Policy 
        Research, Project 21;
           Robert McNally, President, Rapidan Energy 
        Group; and
           Ana Unruh Cohen, Ph.D., Former Staff 
        Director, U.S. House Select Committee on the Climate 
        Crisis.
    (2) The following related hearing was held:
    On February 7, 2023, the Subcommittees on Energy, Climate, 
and Grid Security and Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical 
Materials held a joint hearing entitled, ``Unleashing American 
Energy, Lowering Energy Costs, and Strengthening Supply 
Chains,'' on 17 pieces of legislation, including H.R. 1023. The 
Subcommittees received testimony from:
           The Honorable Mark Menezes, Former United 
        States Deputy Secretary of Energy, Department of 
        Energy;
           The Honorable Bernard McNamee, Former 
        Commissioner, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission;
           Jeffrey Eshelman, II, President and Chief 
        Executive Officer, Independent Petroleum Association of 
        America;
           Katie Sweeney, Executive Vice President and 
        Chief Operating Officer, National Mining Association;
           Raul Garcia, Legislative Director for 
        Healthy Communities, Earthjustice; and
           Tyson Slocum, Director of the Energy 
        Program, Public Citizen.

                        COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE

    Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII, the Committee 
adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared by the Director of 
the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974. At the time this report was 
filed, the estimate was not available.

       EARMARK, LIMITED TAX BENEFITS, AND LIMITED TARIFF BENEFITS

    Pursuant to clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI, the 
Committee finds that H.R. 1023 contains no earmarks, limited 
tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits.

                      ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

    No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) 
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this 
legislation.

                  APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.

             SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION

Section 1. Repeal of greenhouse gas reduction fund

    This section repeals Section 134 of the Clean Air Act and 
rescinds the unobligated balance of any amounts made available 
under this section.

         CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

    With respect to the requirement of clause 3(e) of rule XIII 
of the Rules of the House of Representatives, changes in 
existing law made by the bill, as reported, this section was 
not made available to the Committee in time for the filing of 
this report.

                             MINORITY VIEWS

    We oppose H.R. 1023, legislation to repeal Section 134 of 
the Clean Air Act (CAA), relating to the Greenhouse Gas 
Reduction Fund (GHGRF). H.R. 1023 repeals and rescinds funding 
for the GHGRF, which was enacted as part of the Inflation 
Reduction Act (IRA). Repealing this program will inhibit the 
United States from meeting its climate goals and deprive 
communities of the opportunity to invest in clean energy 
projects that will help them build a more sustainable future.

                               BACKGROUND

    The GHGRF will invest $27 billion to mobilize financing and 
leverage private capital for clean energy projects that reduce 
greenhouse gas emissions--with an emphasis on projects that 
benefit low-income and disadvantaged communities.
    Of the total, $20 billion will be awarded directly from the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to eligible nonprofits. 
The eligible nonprofits will then make awards to other 
financing entities that will provide financial and technical 
assistance for projects that reduce or avoid greenhouse gas 
emissions; 40 percent of that funding is required to assist 
disadvantaged communities. The remaining $7 billion will be 
awarded to state, local and Tribal governments as well as 
eligible nonprofits to enable low-income and disadvantaged 
communities to deploy or benefit from zero-emission 
technologies. In February 2023, EPA announced the initial 
program design for the GHGRF after soliciting stakeholder 
feedback.\1\ Funding has yet to be awarded.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Announces Initial Program 
Design of Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (Feb. 14, 2023) (www.epa.gov/
newsreleases/epa-announces-initial-program-design-greenhouse-gas-
reduction-fund).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The GHGRF is a critical tool for tackling the climate 
crisis, lowering energy costs, and advancing environmental 
justice. This program has unprecedented potential. It will 
improve lives by investing in high-impact, community-based 
projects that reduce climate pollution and improve public 
health outcomes.
    During Committee consideration, proponents of H.R. 1023 
characterized the GHGRF as a so called ``slush fund for green 
advocacy groups.''\2\ This characterization could not be 
further from the truth. In reality, this program builds upon 
the successful model and track record of green banks and 
community-based lenders--like community development financial 
institutions (CDFIs) and credit unions--that have expanded 
access to green capital in states, cities, and regions. 
Likewise, the GHGRF's $7 billion program for states, local 
governments, and Tribes will allow communities to tailor clean 
energy solutions to their geographic, market, and regulatory 
needs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Statement of 
Representative Gary Palmer, Markup of Seven Bills, 118th Cong. (Feb. 
28, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The GHGRF promises to play a unique and vital role filling 
gaps in accessing green capital. By law, the GHGRF's $20 
billion program is required to support projects that otherwise 
lack access to capital. For these reasons and more, the GHGRF 
has wide support from environmental groups, environmental 
justice organizations, financing entities and state and local 
governments.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\See eg. Letter from Earthjustice et al., to Rep. Cathy McMorris 
Rodgers, Chair, House Committee on Energy and Commerce et al. (Feb. 7, 
2023); Letter from National Association of Counties, National League of 
Cities, and U.S. Conference of Mayors, to Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, 
Chair, House Committee on Energy and Commerce and Rep. Frank Pallone, 
Jr., Ranking Member, House Committee on Energy and Commerce (Mar. 7, 
2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          SUMMARY OF H.R. 1023

    H.R. 1023 repeals Section 134 of the CAA, which established 
the GHGRF, and rescinds all unobligated funds provided under 
the section.
    During Committee consideration of H.R. 1023, Democratic 
Members offered several amendments intended to minimize the 
negative impacts of rescinding the GHGRF without a comparable 
program to replace it. The IRA is projected to reduce 
greenhouse gas emissions by 42 percent below 2005 levels by 
2030, likely more once the GHGRF is fully implemented.\4\ Every 
Republican Committee member voted against an amendment to 
ensure the U.S. would still meet the projected greenhouse gas 
reduction as a result of IRA implementation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\Rhodium Group, Provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act (Aug. 
12, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Despite comments from Republican members to the contrary, 
human activity is a driver of the climate crisis and without 
action, the global temperature will continue to rise, having 
deleterious effects on food systems, public health, energy 
production, and infrastructure, among other areas. According to 
the National Climate Assessment, ``Climate change creates new 
risks and exacerbates existing vulnerabilities in communities 
across the United States, presenting growing challenges to 
human health and safety, quality of life, and the rate of 
economic growth.''\5\ Every Republican Committee member voted 
against an amendment requiring the EPA Administrator to certify 
that disadvantaged communities would not be harmed by the 
repeal of the GHGRF before the bill could go into effect. 
Climate change has and will continue to disproportionately 
impact low-income and vulnerable communities, who have a lower 
capacity to prepare for and cope with climate-related events. 
By rescinding the over $15 billion in funding dedicated to 
disadvantaged communities, the majority would be taking away 
resources, good-paying, clean energy jobs, reduced energy 
bills, and other opportunities that will create a more 
sustainable future for these underserved communities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\U.S. Global Change Research Program, Impacts, Risks, and 
Adaptation in the United States: Fourth National Climate Assessment, 
Volume II (2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Finally, the majority indicated that the GHGRF is a risk to 
national--security an argument not founded in reality. It's 
climate change that poses the serious threat to our nation's 
security, which is why the Department of Defense, along with 
other federal agencies, have developed climate adaptation and 
mitigation plans.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\U.S. Department of Defense, DOD, Other Agencies Release Climate 
Adaptation Progress Reports (Oct. 6, 2022) (www.defense.gov/News/News-
Stories/Article/Article/3182522/dod-other-agencies-release-climate-
adaptation-progress-reports/#::text=DOD%20has%20identified 
%20climate%20change,existing%20and%20planned%20equipment%20needs).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               CONCLUSION

    H.R. 1023 is nothing more than a political vendetta against 
the historic climate achievements of the IRA. The majority is 
rushing to rescind the GHGRF as they underestimate the real 
threat of climate change. The GHGRF will be a transformational 
program that will invest in projects that will be driven by and 
support local communities. Without a plan in place to address 
climate change, Committee Republicans are leaving Americans 
even more vulnerable to the impacts of climate change and 
robbing them of a once-in-a-generation investment that will 
spur the economy, improve health impacts, reduce energy costs, 
and create good-paying clean energy jobs.
    For the reasons stated above, we dissent from the views 
contained in the Committee's report.
                                        Frank Pallone, Jr.,
                  Ranking Member, Committee on Energy and Commerce.

                                  [all]