Mr. Chair, last year, the EPA issued a final rule to disqualify many refrigerants and other chemicals. The rule contained aggressive deadlines for the phase-out of many chemicals. Some of those deadlines applied within 6 months. Historical experience with the Montreal Protocol indicated that manufacturers needed 6-plus years to successfully transition between new materials. It is nice if the Fortune 100 companies, as the gentleman mentioned, are able to quickly transfer their technologies, but a lot of Main Street people can't. They just simply go broke. Clearly, the EPA chose winners and losers, and for the losers, the timelines are absolutely unworkable. Manufacturers need time to implement engineering and technology changes and to address new risk and safety challenges. No sooner did the EPA finalize its regulation last year to disqualify certain products than the EPA initiated version 2.0--that the rulemaking is now in the works. This is truly an out-of-control process that is driven by the White House's agenda. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Share & report
More from Ken Calvert
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1160, I call up the bill (H.R. 8034) making emergency supplemental appropriations to respond to the situation in Israel and for related expenses for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and…
Mr. Chair, these are noncontroversial bipartisan amendments supported by both sides. I reserve the balance of my time. Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chair, once again, I support this amendment. It contains a series of bipartisan amendments that are…
I agree with the former secretary, Jim Mattis, who advocated for annual 3 to 5 percent real growth in defense top line.
Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today to offer H.R. 8774, the 2025 Department of Defense Appropriations Act. I want to start by thanking Chairman Cole for his leadership in this process. I also thank the…





