LAMAR S. SMITH, Taxae	

EDDIE BtRNICE JOHNSON, Texae CHAIRMAN	

RANKING MEMBER 

cEongremas of the 'United '15tates 

touse of Representatiues 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY 

2321 RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING


WASHINGTON, DC 20515-6301


(202)225-6371 

www.science.house.gov

Deceinber 6, 2013 

T,he Honorable Gina McCarthy 

Administrator 

U.S. Enviromnental Protection Agency 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20460 

Dear Adnlinists•ator McCarthy, 

We are writing to express our serious concerns with the lack of balance and transparency 

in the Environrnental Protection Agency's (EPA) public outreach process associated with 

forthcoming greenhouse gas regulations for existing power plants. As you know, these 

regulations are likely to be arnong the most costly in EPA history, with the potential to have 

major negative impacts on the affordable and reliable electricity that is a foundation of 

America's economic strength. 

On Septeinber 30, EPA announced a"listening session tour" to "solicit ideas and input 

from the public and stakeholders about the best Clean Air Act approaches" to regulating existing 

power plants. l In the Agency's own words, "tlle feedback from these 11 public listening 

sessions will play an important role in helping EPA develop smart, cost-effective guidelines that 

reflect the latest and best information available."Z 

The listening sessions, which coricluded on Novenzber 8, had the potential to be a 

genuine opportunity for EPA to ensure a robust; interactive process that could result in sensible, 

balanced, rulemalcing. However, this opportunity was squandered due to two fundamental flaws 

in EPA's approach. 

First, as has been widely reported, EPA chose to hold nearly all of these listening 

sessions in areas of the countiy that would be the least affected by the ililes. EPA's Public 

Involvement Policy states that "when the subject of a public hearing, meeting or other 

inforniatian exchange process relates to conditions or facilities in a specific geo raphic area, 

EPA should hold the public hearing ar meeting in that general geographic area." Nonetheless, 

1 EPA News Release, "EPA to Hold Public Listening Sessions on Reducing Carbon Pollution from Existing Power 

Plants," Sep, 30, 2013, available at http://yosemite ,epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/dOcf6618525a9efb85257359003fb

69d/58f7b2a02ac26ea885257bf6006b6908!opendocument_[hereinafter EPA News Release]. 

2 EPA News Release at l, 

' EPA's Office-of Policy, Economics and Innovation, "Public Involvement Policy," May 2003, avaflable at 

http://www.epa.gov/publicinvolvement/pdf/policy2003.pdf.
states which ai-e ainong the most reliant on coal for electricity generation in the country were 

ignored. Adding insult to injury, we were disappointed that,at the Committee's November 14"' 

hearing you rejected multiple requests fiom us to hold additional listening sessions. 

Seconc., and perhaps even more troubling, it is otu tuiderstanding that EPA did not 

transcribe, webcast, or'othervvise record the conmients presented at the 11 listening sessions. If 

there is no recc>rd of what was said, it's unclear how the Agency can claim the sessions were 

designed for tr.e ptupose of "helping EPA develop smart, cost-effective guidelines."' While 

EPA'did allow written comments to be submitted at the sessions, many if not most presenters 

gave only oral remarks. In addition, it is our understanding that EPA does not intend to malce 

public the written cormnents that were submitted. 

Given ihese concerns, we request your response to the following items. 

1. Why did EPA ignore the requirement in its Public Involvement Policy to hold listening 

sessions in the geographic areas of the country most affected by the upcoming rule? 

l	 '	 . 2. We request that EPA hold listening sessions on the fortlhcoming rules in the States most 

affected by EPA's upcoming rule and that these sessions be transcribed and made part of 

the public docket associated with the regulations. We sta.nd ready to work witli you and 

appropi-iate state and local officials to ensure these can be scheduled and carried out at 

minimal cost and burden to the Agency. 

On November 1, 2013, EPA Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, Janet 

McCab,-,, issued a statement on the EPA website asserting that "[w]e want to be open to 

any and all information about what is important to each state and stakeholders" and that 

"[w]e've been working . with everyone from governors, mayors, Members of Congress, 

state and local government officials – from every region of the country — to 

environmental groups, health organizations, faith groups, and many others.s5 For each of 

our states, please provide a list of EPA meetings with and outreach to stakeholders since 

August 1, 2013. 

4. Please cxplain wliy EPA chose not to transcribe or otherwise record the public listening 

sessions. How can the sessions' objective to ensure EPA develops smart and costef-fective guidelines possibly be met if the EPA staff responsible for writing the rule do 

not eveii know what the comments were? What opportunities exist to collect and archive 

coiruneiiters' remarlcs, or otherwise remedy this decision? 

5. In order for stakeholders and the public to see the input that the Agency is considering, 

we ask t:hat EPA make public all written comments submitted to the Agency associated 

with these listening sessions, as well as through the carbonpollutioninputQepa.gov online 

portal. 

" EPA News Release at 1. 

S EPA Connect, "Vigorous Public Outreach to Cut Carbon Pollution and Fight Climate Change," Nov. 1, 2013, 

avatlable at http://blog.epa.gov/epaconnect/2013/11/carbon-pollution-outreach/.

P-i
We recognize that we have significant policy differences when it comes to these rules. 

However, there are clearly areas of opportunity for cooperation. Ultimately, the credibility of 

EPA decisions in these areas will be.greatly enhanced if the American people can trust the 

process through which such decisions are reached. We look forward to working with you to 

make this happen.

Sincerely,

Vjman Cynthi Lummis 

Energy Subcommittee 

Wyoming-AL 

Chairman Steven Palazzo 

Space Subcommittee 

Mississippi-4r" 

Rep. David Schweikert 

Arizona-6cn 

GC'^.- ^ 

Chairman Chris;tte^-I—It 

Environment Subcommittee 

Utah-2nd

^ 

Chairm	arry Bucshon 

Research & Technology Subcommittee 

Indiana-8t" 

.	 ^ 

R . Jim Sensenbrenner 

isconsin-5th 

44wwl(*464* ^

Rep. Thomas Massie 

Kentucky-4"' 

Rep. im Bri enstine 

Oklahoma-1"

/^R Kevin Cramer 

rth Dakota-AL
Sensenbrenner: R 2449 

Buchson: L 1005 

Cramer: L 1032

	 . . 

Schweikert: L 1205 

Lummis: C 113 

Bridenstine: C 216

, 

Massie: C 314 

Stewa rt: C 32 3

^ 

Palazzo: C 33:.