DOD must address national security concerns in proposed emissions rule, say Lucas, Obernolte

U.S. House Science, Space, and Technology Committee leaders Frank Lucas (R-OK) and Jay Obernolte (R-CA) seek more information regarding how the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) plans to address the national security concerns raised around a proposed emissions rule.

DOD, in conjunction with the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council, in late 2022 proposed a rule to mandate that all major contractors disclose their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and set emission reduction targets through a foreign-based company.

“An investigation by this committee found that DOD ignored national security concerns raised by industry experts and others about both the disclosure of [GHG] emissions and the setting of science-based reduction targets with a foreign company,” wrote the congressmen in a March 4 letter sent to Dr. William LaPlante, DOD Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment.

“Due to DOD’s failure, Congress was forced to step in and include language in the National Defense Authorization Act of 2024 postponing enforcement of this proposed rule through the end of 2024, and outright banning enforcement of this provision for nontraditional defense contractors,” added Committee Chairman Lucas and  Investigations and Oversight Subcommittee Chairman Obernolte.

In their letter, Rep. Lucas and Rep. Obernolte, who were joined in signing the letter by House Science, Space, and Technology Subcommittee on Environment Chairman Max Miller (R-OH), emphasized the serious national security concerns that would come from a finalized rule.

For instance, they noted that “the defense industrial base will have to divert time and resources to quantify and disclose the amount of greenhouse gasses generated from production in their own facilities as well as their supply chains,” and “contractors may be forced to redesign weapons systems to incorporate green technologies that are less combat-effective but satisfy a politically motivated mandate.”

The members also pointed out that when DOD was recently pressed on these concerns during a committee briefing, it “failed to explicitly say if national security issues were raised during the drafting of this proposed rule,” and instead made multiple references to the use of waivers to preclude most, if not all, manufacturers from complying with a finalized rule.

“This is highly troubling, as it challenges authorizing the rule at all,” wrote the lawmakers. “If DOD believes waivers will be used often, and regularly, it only validates the national security concerns raised by experts and poses the question of why the rule was proposed in the first place.”   

The committee members requested that LaPlante answer several questions, address their concerns, and share their strategy moving forward by no later than March 18.