Environment, Manufacturing, & Critical Materials


Subcommittee on Environment, Manufacturing, & Critical Materials

All matters related to soil, air, noise and water contamination; emergency environmental response, both physical and cybersecurity. In particular, the subcommittee has jurisdiction over The Nuclear Waste Policy Act, The Clean Air Act, The Safe Drinking Water Act, Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act – including Superfund and the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act, The Solid Waste Disposal Act, The Toxic Substance Control Act and The Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards Program. Under the Clean Air Act, this subcommittee deals with National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for criteria pollutants; National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) Standards; New Source Performance Standards (NSPS); Mobile Source Standards for vehicles, aircraft, fuels and fuel additives, including the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) and greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles. The subcommittee focuses on the regulation of solid, hazardous, and nuclear wastes, including mining, nuclear, oil, gas, and coal combustion waste.

Subcommittees News & Announcements

POSTPONED: Chairs Rodgers and Johnson Postpone East Palestine Field Hearing on Derailment Cleanup Progress

Washington, D.C. — Due to changes in the House Floor schedule requiring Members be present to vote, the Energy and Commerce Committee has postponed its Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Subcommittee field hearing in East Palestine, Ohio, titled “Life After the Train Derailment: Ensuring Transparency and Accountability for the People of East Palestine.”  WHAT: A field hearing to assess the cleanup progress and community needs following the February train derailment and chemical spill in East Palestine, Ohio.  STATUS: This hearing has been postponed due to changes in the House Floor schedule.  If you have any questions concerning the hearing, please contact Kaitlyn Peterson with the Committee staff at Kaitlyn.Peterson@mail.house.gov . For media inquiries, please reach out to Sean Kelly at Sean.Kelly@mail.house.gov .  

Chairs Rodgers & Johnson Announce Legislative Hearing on Revitalizing American Communities By Reauthorizing Brownfields Program

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Subcommittee Chair Bill Johnson (R-OH) today announced a legislative hearing titled “Revitalizing American Communities: Ensuring the Reauthorization of EPA’s Brownfields Program.”  “EPA’s Brownfields program is critical to the cleanup and redevelopment of Brownfield sites across the country. By utilizing existing space and infrastructure, this program has taken development pressure off undeveloped land, helped increase local tax bases, and, most importantly, created jobs in communities across the country,” said Chairs Rodgers and Johnson . “We look forward to discussing reauthorizing the Brownfields program, which has enjoyed bipartisan support in the past. Members will hear from government officials and affected stakeholders about how to ensure the program’s long-term success.”  Subcommittee on Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials legislative hearing titled “Revitalizing American Communities: Ensuring the Reauthorization of EPA’s Brownfields Program.”  WHAT: Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Subcommittee hearing on reauthorizing the EPA’s Brownfields Program.  DATE: Wednesday, September 27, 2023  TIME: 10:00 AM  LOCATION: 2123 Rayburn House Office Building  Legislation to be considered:  H.R.___ , The Revitalization Through Brownfields Act This notice is at the direction of the Chair. The hearing will be open to the public and press and will be live streamed online at https://energycommerce.house.gov/ . If you have any questions concerning the hearing, please contact Kaitlyn Peterson at Kaitlyn.Peterson@mail.house.gov . If you have any press-related questions, please contact Sean Kelly at Sean.Kelly@mail.house.gov .   

Chair Rodgers: “New EPA standards will devastate American manufacturing and jobs”

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) delivered the following remarks at today’s Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Subcommittee hearing titled “Protecting American Manufacturing: Examining EPA’s Proposed PM2.5 Rule.”  Remarks as prepared for delivery:  BIDEN’S WAR ON PROSPERITY & OPPORTUNITY   “For decades, America has been the best place to do business, while also ensuring we have some of the highest environmental standards in the world.  "America has done more to lift people out of poverty and raise the standard of living than any other nation in the world. “That prosperity and opportunity is being threatened today.  “President Biden’s radical rush-to-green agenda is raising costs across the board.   “People are suffering, every time they go to fill up their tank with gas, feed their families, and keep the lights on.   “Now, the EPA is attempting to take this extreme agenda one step further by proposing unattainable standards on fine particulate matter – or PM 2.5.   “This comes after EPA had already concluded the current standards are protective of public health, and this will be devastating for American businesses, people’s livelihoods, and our economic leadership.”  EPA IS CRUSHING AMERICAN JOBS & THE ECONOMY   “As we will hear from witnesses, if EPA finalizes these unrealistic PM standards, there will be far-reaching consequences, including pushing us further to the brink of a recession.  “These standards will make it nearly impossible to build new manufacturing facilities, including for things like EVs and semiconductors.    “It will undermine the work to expand America’s manufacturing base, making it impossible to secure our supply chains and build products that people have come to rely on every day.   “The harm would extend to nearly every sector of our economy as well, like power, agriculture, construction, and forestry.   “Studies indicate this could jeopardize hundreds of billions of dollars in U.S. economic activity and millions of jobs.”   CURRENT STANDARDS ARE ENHANCING THE ENVIRONMENT   “The proposed standards could actually make it more difficult to protect people from harmful air pollutants, a fundamental responsibility of the EPA.   “By all measures, the nation’s air quality has improved dramatically since the Clean Air Act was signed into law, and the current standards are improving quality even more.    “Overall, emissions of pollutants regulated by air quality standards have dropped 73 percent since 1980.   “Air quality for this particular category today is more than 40 percent better than in 2000.  “All told, U.S. air quality is the best in the world, and it’s getting cleaner.  “Just three years ago, the EPA confirmed that the current standards for PM 2.5 were protective of public health, following a comprehensive review required by law.  “Despite this progress, the Biden EPA is taking steps to introduce these new, completely ‘divorced from reality’ standards.  “This will force investors and jobs out of the U.S. and benefit countries like China, the largest polluter in the world with the worst environmental standards. "It could make air quality even worse for many Americans, as the new limits would prevent the needed management to prevent wildfires, which cause a lot of the PM emissions.”   GRIDLOCK LOCAL INVESTMENTS & BUSINESS   “This reckless agenda to crush American manufacturing will be unworkable for states and local governments, making it difficult to permit investments in their communities and grow their local economies.    "Behind me are the maps that show the current standard and the counties that are open for manufacturing, and then the nonattainment areas [with the most stringent proposed standards]. “A fifth of all U.S. counties could find that they’re not in compliance with the most radical levels the EPA is proposing.   “They’ll be gridlocked with new regulations and controls, losing opportunities to improve the lives of the people.    “Even areas that meet the standards will be unable to permit expanded or new manufacturing and industry, and depending on the level of these new standards, these burdens could extend across much of the nation, including the most economically active areas of the country.   "What we see is that the regulatory burdens and restrictions put in place already are crushing our economy, making it impossible to create economic opportunity. This is not how the Clean Air Act was meant to be used.  “We need to stay focused on the real goal, which is continued American economic leadership while also ensuring clean and safe communities for people and their families.  “This is how we’ve led for decades and how we continue to be a world leader in reducing emissions, improving air quality, lifting people out of poverty, and raising the standard of living.” 

Subcommittee Members


Chairman Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials

Bill Johnson


Ohio – District 6

Vice Chair Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials

John Joyce


Pennsylvania – District 13

Ranking Member Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials

Paul Tonko


New York – District 20

Buddy Carter


Georgia – District 1

Gary Palmer


Alabama – District 6

Dan Crenshaw


Texas – District 2

Randy Weber


Texas – District 14

Rick Allen


Georgia – District 12

Troy Balderson


Ohio – District 12

Russ Fulcher


Idaho – District 1

August Pfluger


Texas – District 11

Mariannette Miller-Meeks


Iowa – District 1

Jay Obernolte


California – District 23

Cathy McMorris Rodgers


Washington – District 5

Diana DeGette


Colorado – District 1

Jan Schakowsky


Illinois – District 9

John Sarbanes


Maryland – District 3

Yvette Clarke


New York – District 9

Raul Ruiz


California – District 25

Scott Peters


California – District 50

Nanette Barragán


California – District 44

Frank Pallone


New Jersey – District 6

Recent Letters

Tens of Thousands Voice Concerns Over Proposed EPA Rule That Could Raise Costs and Decimate Businesses

E&C Republicans Demand an Extension of EPA’s Comment Period for Proposed PFOA and PFOS CERCLA Designation    Washington D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Subcommittee Chair Bill Johnson (R-OH) sent a letter to the EPA urging the agency to reopen its comment period on a proposed new rule that designates all Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluorooctanesulfonic Acid (PFOS) as hazardous substances. Given the unprecedented nature of the rule, as well as the concerns raised during EPA’s initial comment period, the members requested the agency reopen the comment period for an additional 60 days. BACKGROUND:  On September 6, 2022, EPA proposed a new rule that would designate PFOA and PFOS as “hazardous substances” under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act ( CERCLA ).   The EPA has never—in the more than 40 years since its enactment—used its CERCLA authority in this way.  Furthermore, the rule was proposed without thoroughly reviewing the indirect costs and economic implications for designating all PFOA and PFOS chemicals as hazardous, which is why the Office of Management and Budget reversed EPA’s view that this proposal was not “economically significant.”  A hazardous substance designation for PFOS and PFOA would have permanent, far-reaching implications for manufacturers, consumers, municipalities, and disposal companies, and could jeopardize products and services that Americans rely on every day—including smartphones and home appliances, to life-saving medical devices, airplanes, and more.  PFOA and PFOS cleanup is urgently needed, but this rule raises legitimate and significant implementation and environmental questions that must be addressed.  KEY EXCERPTS:  “We urge you to give the American public a more robust opportunity to provide meaningful input.”  […]  “The public’s voices should be heard now rather than later in a hearing room or court room. We encourage EPA to reopen the public docket and extend the comment period for, at a minimum, an additional 60 days, to subject this proposal to a complete airing under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement and Fairness Act, ensure an objective and transparent accounting and weighing of the costs and benefits of this proposal, and to reconsider and eliminate its potential negative public policy outcomes, especially those that are reasonably foreseeable.”  CLICK HERE to read the full letter.  CLICK HERE to read about Republican pushback to extreme PFAS legislation in July 2021.  CLICK HERE to read about past CERCLA proposals targeting PFAS. 

Sep 5, 2023
Press Release

E&C Republicans Press Ford for Information on Planned EV Battery Plant with Ties to China

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans, led by Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers, wrote to Ford President and CEO James Farley regarding a new partnership with Chinese-owned Contemporary Amperex Technology Co., Limited (CATL) to build lithium iron phosphate batteries in the United States.  CLICK HERE to read FOX News's coverage: BACKGROUND :  Earlier this year, Ford announced it would invest $3.5 billion to construct a lithium iron phosphate battery plant in Marshall, Michigan.  According to Ford, its wholly-owned subsidiary will manufacture the battery cells using Chinese company CATL’s technology and services.  KEY LETTER EXCERPTS :  “While Ford has labeled this project a ‘commitment to American manufacturing’ and asserts it will create 2,500 new American jobs, we are concerned that Ford’s partnership with a Chinese company could aid China’s efforts to expand its control over United States electric vehicle supply chains and jeopardize national security by furthering dependence on China.”  […]  “Additionally, Members learned at this hearing that Chinese companies often supply their own workers to projects in Latin America and Africa, reinforcing fears that CATL will import workers for this facility rather that creating jobs for United States workers.”  […]  “We seek to learn more about whether this partnership, and others like it, will potentially exacerbate our reliance on China. Should China gain control of domestic electric vehicle production, the United States would be exposed to serious national security risks at a time of escalating geopolitical tensions.”  The Members requested information and answers to the following questions by September 18, 2023:  A copy of the complete licensing agreement between Ford and CATL, including any appendices, amendments, or addenda.  All documents and communications exchanged between Ford officers or employees and officials, appointees, employees, contractors, or consultants of the United States government referring or relating to Ford and CATL’s partnership and eligibility for tax credits and federal incentives.  Did Ford consider making a similar investment in a partnership with a non-Chinese company? If so, why did Ford ultimately decide to partner with CATL? If not, why did Ford not consider other partners?  How many CATL employees will CATL supply to the Facility?  What steps did Ford take to prevent or limit CATL’s ability to halt production unilaterally, such as at the direction of the Chinese government?  CLICK HERE to read the letter. 

Chairs Rodgers, Duncan, and Johnson Request Information Regarding Implementation of NEPA Reforms at Federal Agencies

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Energy, Climate, and Grid Security Subcommittee Chair Jeff Duncan (R-SC), and Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Subcommittee Chair Bill Johnson (R-OH) sent letters to the Department of Energy (DOE), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) regarding their progress implementing National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reforms included in the Fiscal Responsibility Act (FRA). BACKGROUND:   FRA, which was signed into law by President Biden on June 3, 2023, included a provision directing DOE, EPA, NRC, and FERC to implement changes to NEPA.  In order to boost energy production and lower energy prices for Americans, it is critical that these agencies implement these changes, which lift regulatory burdens for the construction of more energy infrastructure.  The years-long, complicated reviews involved with NEPA and resulting litigation have sidelined many energy infrastructure projects across the U.S.  The provisions in the FRA would streamline NEPA and improve review times and the overall regulatory efficiency. The purpose of the letter is to ensure that these agencies are following the intent of Congress and adhering to the coordination requirements and deadlines set forth by the FRA. KEY EXCERPT FROM THE LETTER TO ENERGY SECRETARY GRANHOLM: "Section 321 of the FRA includes provisions from H.R. 1577, the BUILDER Act, which also passed the House of Representatives as part of H.R. 1, the Lower Energy Costs Act. The section in the FRA streamlines NEPA and improves federal review times by designating one lead agency, limiting evaluation to a single environmental document, setting page limits on environmental impact statements (EIS) and environmental assessments (EA), establishing deadlines of two years for EISs and one year for EAs, allowing for categorical exclusions, and instituting the E-NEPA unified permitting portal, among other provisions. Depending on the project, DOE could be considered a lead agency or a cooperating agency, both of which would have a key role in the implementation of the corresponding NEPA reforms." Members asked Secretary Granholm to respond to the following questions regarding the FRA NEPA changes by September 18, 2023:  What is DOE’s interpretation of Section 321 of the FRA?    How long will it take DOE to implement fully Section 321 of the FRA?   What changes are being made to DOE’s existing NEPA review processes to ensure that the Agency is following the updated law?    Are you confident that DOE will meet the two-year and one-year statutory deadlines for EIS and EA reviews, respectively?    Will you commit to adhering to the page limits for EIS and EA reviews set forth in the Fiscal Responsibility Act?    Will DOE apply the NEPA changes to projects and reviews that are already in process, or does the Agency plan to apply the NEPA changes just prospectively?  CLICK HERE to read the full letter to DOE. CLICK HERE to read the full letter to EPA. CLICK HERE to read the full letter to NRC. CLICK HERE to read the full letter to FERC.