Serial No. 114-6: The Obama Administration's CEQ Rrecently Revised Draft Guidance for GHG Emissions and the Effects of Climate Change: Oversight Hearing Before the Committee on Natural Resources, U.S. House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, May 13, 2015 [open pdf - 3MB]
Alternate Title: Serial No. 114-6: The Obama Administration's Council on Environmental Quality Rrecently Revised Draft Guidance for Greenhouse Gas Emissions and the Effects of Climate Change: Oversight Hearing Before the Committee on Natural Resources, U.S. House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, May 13, 2015
This is the May 13, 2015 hearing "The Obama Administration's CEQ [Council on Environmental Quality] Recently Revised Draft Guidance for GHG [greenhouse gas] Emissions and the Effects of Climate Change" held before the House Committee on Natural Resources. From the opening statement of the Honorable Louie Gohmert: "The focus of today's hearing is the White House Council on Environmental Quality's sweeping draft guidance on greenhouse gas emissions. On its face, the draft guidance acknowledges that it is not legally enforceable. Some may say that means it is unlawful. Despite not being legally enforceable, curiously, CEQ claims that the guidance will facilitate compliance and improve efficiency and consistency of existing NEPA [National Environmental Policy Act] reviews--literally, thousands of reviews annually. Based upon the Federal Government's track record on NEPA, I am highly dubious, but will listen closely to the testimony today for evidence on whether or not that is, indeed, the case. This draft guidance set the stage for potential sweeping Federal overreach, by pushing agencies to examine greenhouse gas emissions that are beyond their ability to control or regulate the impacts, including the vast array of all upstream and downstream impacts. The draft guidance is overly broad, expansive, it goes out- side the scope of NEPA. Otherwise, it is OK. For NEPA to work correctly, Federal agencies must be able to affect the outcome of the proposed projects. But the draft guidance goes far beyond what an agency can control. The results will force more delays, more costs onto economic and energy-related activities nationwide, and uncertainty for those who want to balance the needs important to all Americans with protecting the environment. The draft guidance would even frustrate the Administration's other goals, such as modernizing the Nation's electric grid, to improve energy reliability and resiliency." Statements, Letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: John Christy, Ray Clark, Christy Goldfuss, and Roger R. Martella.
Serial No. 114-6
U.S. Government Printing Office: https://www.gpo.gov/