[House Report 119-595]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
119th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session } { 119-595
=======================================================================
FIRE IMPROVEMENT AND REFORMING EXCEPTIONAL EVENTS ACT
----------------
April 9, 2026.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
----------------
Mr. Guthrie, from the Committee on Energy and Commerce,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
together with
MINORITY VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 6387]
The Committee on Energy and Commerce, to whom was referred
the bill (H.R. 6387) to amend the Clean Air Act to require
revisions to regulations governing the review and handling of
air quality monitoring data influenced by exceptional events or
actions to mitigate wildfire risk, 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 Votes.................................................. 4
Oversight Findings and Recommendations........................... 6
New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures 6
Congressional Budget Office Estimate............................. 6
Federal Mandates Statement....................................... 6
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives............ 6
Duplication of Federal Programs.................................. 6
Related Committee and Subcommittee Hearings...................... 6
Committee Cost Estimate.......................................... 7
Earmark, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff Benefits....... 7
Advisory Committee Statement..................................... 7
Applicability to Legislative Branch.............................. 7
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation................... 7
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............ 8
Minority, Additional, or Dissenting Views........................ 12
Purpose And Summary
The purpose of H.R. 6387 is to amend the Clean Air Act
(CAA) to encourage wildfire mitigation efforts and provide
clarity on how to treat the air monitoring data resulting from
these activities in attaining a National Ambient Air Quality
Standard (NAAQS).
Background and Need for Legislation
CLEAN AIR ACT & EXCEPTIONAL EVENTS
The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) to set air quality standards for
ambient air pollutants that are reasonably anticipated to
endanger public health and welfare. The CAA directs EPA to
establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). EPA
sets NAAQS for six criteria air pollutants: carbon monoxide,
lead, particulate matter, ozone, nitrogen dioxide, and sulfur
dioxide. Wildfires emit all of these air pollutants. After the
EPA establishes these standards, States are primarily
responsible for implementing and enforcing the standards.
In 2005, Congress amended the CAA to avoid penalizing
States for air pollutants outside of their control. These
amendments created the Exceptional Events Rule (EER) which
allows states to petition the EPA to exempt days with high
wildfire-produced smoke from being considered in their PM2.5
and PM10 compliance. To meet the criteria for EER an
exceptional event must: (1) affect air quality; (2) be not
reasonably controllable or preventable; (3) be a natural event
or caused by human activity that is unlikely to recur; and (4)
determined by the Secretary to be excludable under EPA
regulations.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\42 U.S.C. Sec. 7619(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 16, 2025, EPA issued guidance on prescribed
fires in a memo entitled ``EPA Policy on Provisions to Allow
Wildland Prescribed Fire in Clean Air Act State Implementation
Plans.'' In that memo, EPA clarified that ``any regulatory
provisions that would limit the strategic deployment of
prescribed fires should not be included in SIPs as part of the
control strategies for attainment or maintenance of the
NAAQS.'' The guidance's stated purpose was to encourage states
to engage in wildfire mitigation practices.
WILDFIRES & AIR POLLUTION
Wildfires in the U.S. are increasing in severity and
frequency. Smoke from wildfires is currently one of the largest
sources of air pollution. The PM2.5 and PM10 particulates
produced by wildfires travel long distances, impacting air
quality across the country. Over the last several years, smoke
from wildfires has caused significant declines in air quality
in the U.S.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\D.W. Schweizer & R. Cisneros, Forest Fire Policy: Change
Conventional Thinking of Smoke Management to Prioritize Long-Term Air
Quality and Public Health, 10 Air Quality Atmosphere & Health, at 33
(2016); See also G.J. Williamson, D.M.J.S. Bowman, O.F. Price, S.B.
Henderson & F.H. Johnston, A Transdisciplinary Approach to
Understanding the Health Effects of Wildfire and Prescribed Fire Smoke
Regimes, Env't RSCH. Letters, at 1 (Dec. 6, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRESCRIBED FIRE & WILDFIRE MITIGATION EFFORTS
Land treated with mechanical thinning and prescribed burns
results in a 32 percent decline in average fire severity and
the occurrence of high-severity wildfires was reduced by 88
percent.\3\ Recent studies estimate that expanding the practice
of prescribed burns or brush management could reduce air
pollution by 655,000 tons over the next 5 years.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\Ethan Yackulic, et al., Rising from the ashes: treatments
stabilize carbon storage in California's frequent-fire forests, Front.
In Forests & Global Change (2025).
\4\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Despite broad consensus that the practice of prescribed
burns and other wildfire mitigation measures, like mechanical
thinning, are the most effective way to reduce the severity and
risk of wildfires they are still underutilized in the U.S.
because of the limits created by federal air quality laws.
Facilitating prescribed burns prevents and reduces the
growing risks of wildfires. EPA has routinely and consistently
recognized the increase in PM emissions from wildfires and the
need for prescribed burns. Despite proof that prescribed fires
minimize wildfire intensity and the amount of emissions per
acre, states are often forced to prioritize certainty in NAAQS
attainment over the future benefit of wildfire mitigation.
Updating the EER allows states to encourage wildfire mitigation
practices without fear that such practices will make them
unable to meet the CAA's air quality standards.
On June 11, 2025, the Subcommittee on Environment held a
hearing on H.R. 6387. The title of the hearing was ``Short-
Circuiting Progress: How the Clean Air Act Impacts Building
Necessary Infrastructure and Onshoring American Innovation.''
The Subcommittee received testimony from:
James W. Boylan, Chief, Air Protection
Branch, Georgia Environmental Protection Division;
Chad Whiteman, Vice President, Environment
and Regulatory Affairs, U.S. Chamber of Commerce;
Paul Noe, Vice President, Public Policy,
American Forest & Paper Association;
John Walke, Director, Federal Clean Air &
Senior Attorney, National Resources Defense Council.
On September 16, 2025 the Subcommittee on Environment held
a hearing on H.R. 6387. The title of the hearing was ``From
Gridlock to Growth: Permitting Reform Under the Clean Air
Act.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from:
Clint Woods, Commissioner, Indiana
Department of Environmental Management;
Mark Gebbia, Vice President, Environmental
and Permitting, Williams;
Ashley Kunz, Senior Director, Environmental
Health and Safety, Micron;
Danny Seiden, President and CEO, Arizona
Chamber of Commerce and Industry;
Kerri Powell, Senior Attorney for Community
Health and Air Program Leader, Southern Environmental
Law Center;
Ali Mirzakhalili, Air Quality Division
Administrator, Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality.
On December 10, 2025, the Subcommittee on Environment met
in open markup session and forwarded H.R. 6387, without
amendment, to the full Committee by a record vote of 13 yeas
and 10 nays. On January 21, 2026, the full Committee on Energy
and Commerce met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 6387,
without amendment, favorably reported to the House by a record
vote of 27 yeas and 23 nays.
Committee Votes
Clause 3(b) of rule XIII requires the Committee to list the
record votes on the motion to report legislation and amendments
thereto. The following reflects the record votes taken during
the Committee consideration:
[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 (a) hearing(s) 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. 6387 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 amend
the Clean Air Act to promote wildfire mitigation efforts.
Duplication of Federal Programs
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(5) of rule XIII, no provision of
H.R. 6387 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, the following
related hearing was used to develop or consider H.R. 6387:
On June 11, 2025, the Subcommittee on Environment held a
hearing on H.R. 6387. The title of the hearing was ``Short-
Circuiting Progress: How the Clean Air Act Impacts Building
Necessary Infrastructure and Onshoring American Innovation.''
The Subcommittee received testimony from:
James W. Boylan, Chief, Air Protection
Branch, Georgia Environmental Protection Division;
Chad Whiteman, Vice President, Environment
and Regulatory Affairs, U.S. Chamber of Commerce;
Paul Noe, Vice President, Public Policy,
American Forest & Paper Association;
John Walke, Director, Federal Clean Air &
Senior Attorney, National Resources Defense Council.
On September 16, 2025 the Subcommittee on Environment held
a hearing on H.R. 6387. The title of the hearing was ``From
Gridlock to Growth: Permitting Reform Under the Clean Air
Act.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from:
Clint Woods, Commissioner, Indiana
Department of Environmental Management;
Mark Gebbia, Vice President, Environmental
and Permitting, Williams;
Ashley Kunz, Senior Director, Environmental
Health and Safety, Micron;
Danny Seiden, President and CEO, Arizona
Chamber of Commerce and Industry;
Kerri Powell, Senior Attorney for Community
Health and Air Program Leader, Southern Environmental
Law Center;
Ali Mirzakhalili, Air Quality Division
Administrator, Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality.
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. 6387 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. Short title
This section provides the short title, the ``Fire
Improvement and Reforming Exceptional Events Act'' or ``FIRE
Act.''
Section 2. Air quality monitoring data influenced by exceptional events
or actions to mitigate wildfire risk
This section revises the definition of exceptional event to
include a natural event, an event caused by human activity that
is intended to mirror the occurrence or reoccurrence of a
natural event, or caused by human activity that is unlikely to
recur. The section clarifies that an exceptional event does not
include stagnation of air masses that ordinarily occur,
meteorological inversions, or air pollution relating to source
noncompliance.
The section also defines ``action to mitigate wildfire
risk'' as prescribed fire or similar measures undertaken in
accordance with State approved practices, to reduce the risk of
wildfire.
The section also requires a mechanism for the EPA to
conduct regional modeling for multistate air quality events.
The section also includes measures to increase transparency and
reporting requirements.
Section 2 also amends the requirement for establishing a
clear and causal relationship adding language that requires
that a clear causal relationship must exist, or be reasonably
expected to exist, between the measured exceedances of a
national ambient air quality standard and the exceptional event
or action to mitigate wildfire risk to demonstrate that the
exceptional event or action to mitigate wildfire risk caused a
specific air pollution concentration at a particular air
quality monitoring location.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italics, and existing law in which no
change is proposed is shown in roman):
CLEAN AIR ACT
* * * * * * *
TITLE III--GENERAL
* * * * * * *
SEC. 319. AIR QUALITY MONITORING.
(a) In General.--After notice and opportunity for public
hearing, the Administrator shall promulgate regulations
establishing an air quality monitoring system throughout the
United States which--
(1) utilizes uniform air quality monitoring criteria
and methodology and measures such air quality according
to a uniform air quality index,
(2) provides for air quality monitoring stations in
major urban areas and other appropriate areas
throughout the United States to provide monitoring such
as will supplement (but not duplicate) air quality
monitoring carried out by the States required under any
applicable implementation plan,
(3) provides for daily analysis and reporting of air
quality based upon such uniform air quality index, and
(4) provides for recordkeeping with respect to such
monitoring data and for periodic analysis and reporting
to the general public by the Administrator with respect
to air quality based upon such data.
The operation of such air quality monitoring system may be
carried out by the Administrator or by such other departments,
agencies, or entities of the Federal Government (including the
National Weather Service) as the President may deem
appropriate. Any air quality monitoring system required under
any applicable implementation plan under section 110 shall, as
soon as practicable following promulgation of regulations under
this section, utilize the standard criteria and methodology,
and measure air quality according to the standard index,
established under such regulations.
(b) Air Quality Monitoring Data Influenced by Exceptional
Events Or Actions To Mitigate Wildfire Risk.--
(1) [Definition of exceptional event] Definitions.--
In this section:
[(A) In general.--The term ``exceptional
event'' means an event that--]
(A) Exceptional event._
(i) In general._The term
``exceptional event'' means an event
that--
[(i)] (I) affects air quality;
[(ii)] (II) is not reasonably
controllable or preventable;
[(iii) is an event caused by human
activity that is unlikely to recur at a
particular location or a natural event;
and]
(III) is an event that is--
(aa) a natural event;
(bb) caused by a
human activity that is
intended to mirror the
occurrence or
reoccurrence of a
natural event; or
(cc) caused by a
human activity that is
unlikely to recur; and
[(iv)] (IV) is determined by the
Administrator through the process
established in the regulations
promulgated under paragraph (2) to be
an exceptional event.
(ii) Exclusions.--In this subsection,
the term ``exceptional event'' does not
include--
(I) ordinarily occurring
stagnation of air masses;
(II) meteorological
inversions; or
(III) air pollution relating
to source noncompliance.
[(B) Exclusions.--In this subsection, the
term ``exceptional event'' does not include--
[(i) stagnation of air masses or
meteorological inversions;
[(ii) a meteorological event
involving high temperatures or lack of
precipitation; or
[(iii) air pollution relating to
source noncompliance.]
(B) Action to mitigate wildfire risk.--The
term ``action to mitigate wildfire risk'' means
a prescribed fire or similar measure,
undertaken in accordance with State approved
practices, to reduce the risk and severity of
wildfires.
(2) Regulations.--
(A) Proposed regulations.--Not later than
[March 1, 2006] 18 months after the date of
enactment of the FIRE Act, after consultation
with Federal land managers and State air
pollution control agencies, the Administrator
shall publish in the Federal Register proposed
revisions to regulations governing the review
and handling of air quality monitoring data
influenced by exceptional events or actions to
mitigate wildfire risk.
(B) Final regulations.--Not later than 1 year
after the date on which the Administrator
publishes proposed regulations under
subparagraph (A), including proposed revisions
to regulations, and after providing an
opportunity for interested persons to make oral
presentations of views, data, and arguments
regarding the proposed regulations, the
Administrator shall promulgate final
regulations governing the review and handling
or air quality monitoring data influenced by an
exceptional event or action to mitigate
wildfire risk that are consistent with
[paragraph (3)] this section.
(C) Regional analysis.--When more than one
State notifies the Administrator of its intent
to submit a petition pursuant to this section
for an exceptional event or an action to
mitigate wildfire risk for the same air quality
event, or, if the Administrator determines such
a multistate air quality event has occurred,
the Administrator shall conduct regional
modeling and analysis sufficient to satisfy the
demonstration required for an exceptional event
or an action to mitigate wildfire risk petition
for such air quality event.
(D) Transparency.--Not later than 12 months
after the date of enactment of the FIRE Act,
the Administrator shall establish, and
thereafter update monthly, a public website
describing the status of all petitions
submitted pursuant to this section for
exceptional events and actions to mitigate
wildfire risk.
(3) Principles and requirements.--
(A) Principles.--In promulgating regulations
under this section, the Administrator shall
follow--
(i) the principle that protection of
public health is the highest priority;
(ii) the principle that actions to
mitigate wildfire risk can play an
important role in reducing the
magnitude and frequency of wildfires;
[(ii)] (iii) the principle that
timely information should be provided
to the public in any case in which the
air quality is unhealthy;
[(iii)] (iv) the principle that all
ambient air quality data should be
included in a timely manner, an
appropriate Federal air quality
database that is accessible to the
public;
[(iv)] (v) the principle that each
State must take necessary measures to
safeguard public health regardless of
the source of the air pollution; and
[(v)] (vi) the principle that air
quality data should be carefully
screened to ensure that events not
likely to recur are represented
accurately in all monitoring data and
analyses.
(B) Requirements.--Regulations promulgated
under this section shall, at a minimum, provide
that--
(i) the occurrence of an exceptional
event or action to mitigate wildfire
risk must be demonstrated by reliable,
accurate data that is promptly produced
and provided by Federal, State, or
local government agencies;
[(ii) a clear causal relationship
must exist between the measured
exceedances of a national ambient air
quality standard and the exceptional
event to demonstrate that the
exceptional event caused a specific air
pollution concentration at a particular
air quality monitoring location;]
(ii) a clear causal relationship must
exist, or be reasonably expected to
exist, between the measured exceedances
of a national ambient air quality
standard and the exceptional event or
action to mitigate wildfire risk to
demonstrate that the exceptional event
or action to mitigate wildfire risk
caused a specific air pollution
concentration at a particular air
quality monitoring location;
(iii) there is a public process for
determining whether an event is
exceptional; and
[(iv) there are criteria and
procedures for the Governor of a State
to petition the Administrator to
exclude air quality monitoring data
that is directly due to exceptional
events from use in determinations by
the Administrator with respect to
exceedances or violations of the
national ambient air quality
standards.]
(iv) there are criteria and
procedures for the Governor of a State
to petition the Administrator to
exclude air quality monitoring data
that is directly due to exceptional
events or actions to mitigate wildfire
risk from use in determinations by the
Administrator with respect to--
(I) area or source
exceedances or violations of
the national ambient air
quality standards;
(II) the designation,
redesignation, classification,
or reclassification of an area;
(III) the demonstration by a
State of attainment of a
national ambient air quality
standard;
(IV) attainment
determinations;
(V) attainment date
extensions;
(VI) finding a State
implementation plan to be
inadequate; or
(VII) preconstruction
demonstrations under section
165(a)(3).
[(4) Interim provision.--Until the effective date of
a regulation promulgated under paragraph (2), the
following guidance issued by the Administrator shall
continue to apply:
[(A) Guidance on the identification and use
of air quality data affected by exceptional
events (July 1986).
[(B) Areas affected by PM-10 natural events,
May 30, 1996.
[(C) Appendices I, K, and N to part 50 of
title 40, Code of Federal Regulations.]
* * * * * * *
MINORITY VIEWS
We oppose H.R. 6387, the ``Fire Improvement and Reforming
Exceptional Events (FIRE) Act,'' which seeks to amend the Clean
Air Act (CAA) to artificially reduce reporting on the severity
of air pollution and mask air pollution concerns by expanding
the list of exceptional events that states can claim in
demonstrating compliance with air quality standards. The bill
makes common events--like drought and hot days--exceptional. As
a result, communities across American will continue to
needlessly breathe unhealthy air.
BACKROUND
Since its enactment, the CAA has driven important progress
in improving air quality and public health. The history of the
CAA demonstrates the success of the law's longstanding approach
and use of valuable tools to measure and curb air pollution.
The CAA has built in flexibility, as Congress recognized that
there are certain events that potentially worsen air pollution
and are beyond our control to mitigate. Therefore, the CAA
allows EPA to exclude emissions from events that are ``unusual
or naturally occurring events that can affect air quality but
are not reasonably controllable using techniques that air
agencies may implement in order to attain and maintain the
[National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)]'' when making
certain regulatory decisions.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\42 U.S.C. 7619(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The majority claims that the goal of the FIRE Act is to
provide clarity and predictability for air quality planning,
reduce unnecessary regulatory burden on manufacturers and
communities, and to reward states for proactive wildfire
mitigation strategies. H.R. 6387 accomplishes none of these
goals.
SUMMARY OF THE FIRE ACT
H.R. 6387 amends CAA Section 319 to drastically expand the
list of ``exceptional events'' states can claim in
demonstrating compliance with air quality standards to include
prescribed fires as well as common conditions and occurrences
that are not, in fact, exceptional--such as hot days or
drought. This will artificially reduce reporting on the
severity of air pollution in an area and cause areas with poor
air quality to appear much better than reality. This all but
ensures that areas having stagnant air masses; experiencing
meteorological inversions, heat waves, or droughts could avoid
addressing their serious air pollution problems. Ultimately,
this change will result in Americans continuing to breath
unhealthy air. Given that pollutants--like ozone--are often
higher on hotter days, such an expansion to the list of
exceptional events would be a significant change.
The Committee received testimony that the expanded
exceptional event definition will complicate the existing
demonstration process for states, including by adding ambiguity
around what could be considered as an action to mitigate
wildfire. For example, it is not clear what a ``State approved
practice'' to mitigate wildfire risk is, or how EPA would
verify that those practices meet the requirements of the CAA.
According to witness testimony, legislation that restores and
bolsters resources that facilitate coordination between
Federal, State, and local air quality agencies would be far
more useful to state air regulators than this provision.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Testimony of Ali
Mirzakhalili, Air Quality Division Administrator, Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality, Hearing on From Gridlock to Growth: Permitting
Reform Under the Clean Air Act, 119th Cong, (Sept. 16, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Republicans claim that this provision will make it easier
for states to expand the use of prescribed burn. However, under
current law EPA already provides a pathway for states to
exclude data influenced by wildfires and prescribed fires,
viewing them as qualifying exceptional events. In fact, EPA
promulgated the 2016 Exceptional Event Rule, which included
guidance on the use of prescribed burns under its existing CAA
authorities.\3\ Prescribed burns have been shown to mitigate
wildfire, and EPA has supported this tool with appropriate
guardrails to protect public health. Since EPA can already
exclude emissions from prescribed burns in NAAQS calculations,
this bill is completely unnecessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\Environmental Protection Agency, Treatment of Data Influenced by
Exceptional Events, 81 Fed. Reg. 68216 (Oct. 3, 2016) (final rule).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is worth noting that the majority acknowledges that the
frequency and intensity of wildfire is increasing but fails to
attribute this trend to climate change. It is ironic, however,
that the majority is seeking to advance legislation to increase
the use of prescribed burns to mitigate the impacts of climate
change, but that same legislation would give industry a free
pass to emit more climate warming pollution during heat waves
or prolonged drought. Concurrently, the Trump Administration
and the Republican majority are working tirelessly to shutter
critical climate programs, including programs that facilitate
better collaboration between local, state, and Federal
governments on forest wildfire management, which are also
essential tools in mitigating fire risk.
CONCLUSION
Because the CAA intentionally allows states to claim a wide
range of phenomena as exceptional events, this bill does not
reduce any so-called regulatory burden on states or
communities. In practice, this bill would add ambiguity to the
existing regulatory process, allow for underreported pollution,
and give polluters a free pass to emit dangerous pollution.
H.R. 6387 is not a good faith attempt to improve wildfire
mitigation activities. To be clear, the FIRE Act is not really
about allowing the use of prescribed burns under the CAA. It is
simply a dishonest attempt by the Republicans to give states a
free pass at increasing dangerous pollution. And by deeming
regular weather occurrences like drought and heat as
exceptional events, Republicans want to use a hot day as an
excuse to write off air pollution and ignore the harm it causes
American communities.
For the reasons stated above, we oppose H.R. 6387.
Frank Pallone, Jr.,
Ranking Member.
[all]