LAMAR S. SMITH, Taxae EDDIE BtRNICE JOHNSON, Texae

CHAIRMAN RANKING MEMBER



# cEongrem

a 

# s 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 listeningsessions. 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-iWe 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, 

# Vj man Cynthi Lummis Energy Subcommittee Wyoming-AL

Chairman Steven Palazzo Space Subcommittee Mississippi-4r"

Rep. David Schweikert Arizona-6cn 

## GC'^.- ^ Chairman Chris; 

## t

te^-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-ALSensenbrenner: 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:.