Rep. Lucas wonders what’s more important…military security or reporting climate emissions


Oklahoma Congressman Frank Lucas is among some in the House who wonder if the Biden administration has gone too far in a proposed emissions rule, one that would require the Defense Department to report on the emissions from its military activities.

Lucas chairs the House Science, Space and Technology Committee and was joined by others on the committee in questioning the steps made by the Defense Department to adddress national security concerns posed by the administration’s green energy push.

Rep. Lucas says if the rule is enacted, it would require U.S. contractors to work with foreign entities to disclose their greenhouse gas emissions and set emission reduction targets, potentially having major implications for our national security and mission readiness.These concerns follow the committee’s memo detailing preliminary findings into its ongoing investigation of this controversial proposal.

“Multiple national security experts have raised concerns, informing the Committee that the disclosure of greenhouse gas emissions in this manner will pose a threat to national security.”

Lucas was joined by subcommittee leaders in addressing a letter to Dr. William LaPlante, Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment for DoD. They pointed to the failure of the Defense Department and the administration in drafting the rule and raising national security issues.

“An investigation by this Committee found that DoD ignored national security concerns raised by industry experts and others about both the disclosure of greenhouse gas emissions and the setting of science-based reduction targets with a foreign company,” the Members said.

“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.”

Additionally alarming to the Members, when DoD was recently pressed on these concerns at a briefing, they “failed to explicitly say if national security issues were raised during the drafting of this proposed rule. Instead, DoD made multiple references to the use of waivers to preclude most, if not all, manufacturers from complying with the rule if finalized.” This is highly troubling, as it challenges authorizing the rule at all. “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.”

Lucas, Obernolte, and Miller request DoD address the committee’s concerns and share their strategy moving forward by no later than March 18, 2024.

Read the full letter to Dr. LaPlante here.