Passed
215 Yea202 Nay13 Not voting1/2 required
HR-4690-119
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Sponsored by Nicholas Langworthy (R-NY)
What it does
This bill would repeal federal energy efficiency performance standards that require new federal buildings and federally renovated buildings to phase out fossil fuel use by FY2030. It would direct the Department of Energy to implement building standards as if the phase-out requirements had never taken effect, until new regulations are issued. It would also prohibit green building certification systems from denying certification to federal buildings solely because those buildings use fossil fuels, directly or indirectly.
Who benefits
Natural gas and other fossil fuel suppliers who would retain federal buildings as customers. Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) contractors and equipment manufacturers specializing in fossil fuel-based systems. Federal agencies that would avoid the cost and disruption of retrofitting existing building systems. Federal construction contractors who would not need to meet electrification requirements. Utilities with large fossil fuel generation portfolios that supply federal facilities.
Who is hurt
Electric heat pump, solar, and other clean energy equipment manufacturers and installers who would lose a guaranteed federal market. Federal workers and building occupants in areas with poor air quality who may experience continued indoor and outdoor emissions from fossil fuel systems. State and local governments that have enacted complementary building electrification policies, whose coordination with federal facilities would be disrupted. Green building certification organizations whose standards would be constrained by federal mandate. Future federal taxpayers who may bear higher long-term energy costs if fossil fuel prices rise relative to electricity.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the FY2030 fossil fuel phase-out deadline imposed unrealistic and costly mandates on federal agencies, requiring expensive retrofits of functional building systems on an accelerated timeline. They contend that forcing federal buildings into all-electric systems in regions where the electric grid is heavily fossil-fuel-dependent does not meaningfully reduce emissions and may increase energy costs for taxpayers. They also argue that green building certification systems should not be able to effectively exclude federal buildings from certification based on energy source alone, preserving flexibility for agencies to choose the most cost-effective and reliable systems for their specific locations and climates.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that repealing the phase-out standards abandons a concrete, legislatively established pathway for reducing the federal government's carbon footprint, which covers roughly 350,000 buildings and represents one of the largest institutional energy consumers in the country. They contend that locking federal buildings into fossil fuel infrastructure now creates long-term stranded asset risk and higher lifecycle costs, since building systems typically last 20–30 years. They also argue that prohibiting green certification systems from applying their own fossil fuel criteria constitutes federal interference with private standard-setting organizations, undermining the integrity of those certification programs.
Passed