Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Sean Casten (IL-06)
November 10, 2025
Washington, D.C. — U.S. Congressman Sean Casten (IL-06), Vice Chair of the House Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition (SEEC), led SEEC leadership members, including Co-Chairs Reps. Doris Matsui, Mike Quigley, and Paul Tonko and Vice Chairs Reps. Don Beyer, Suzanne Bonamici, Mike Levin, and Chellie Pingree, in a letter to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin demanding EPA reverse course and maintain the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program.
“We write to inform you that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is violating clear congressional directives by proposing to end the EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP),” the lawmakers wrote. “For more than a decade, this program has been the most important source of transparent and verifiable climate pollution data in the federal government, and the EPA has clear authority and obligation to continue maintaining it. Ending it would undermine lawful, evidence-based governance at precisely the moment when climate and energy challenges demand better information, not less.”
The Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP), codified and established in a final rule by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 2009, requires large industrial facilities, fuel and industrial-gas suppliers, and CO2 injection sites to monitor and report their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions annually. In September 2025, the EPA proposed eliminating reporting obligations to the GHGRP, undermining transparency, accountability, and the data infrastructure that supports both climate policy and private-sector decision-making. If finalized, it would end mandatory emissions reporting for virtually all large industrial facilities after the 2024 reporting year and suspend or eliminate requirements for the remaining sectors until 2034.
Text of the letter can be found below. A copy of the letter can be found here.
Dear Administrator Zeldin,
We write to inform you that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is violating clear congressional directives by proposing to end the EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP). For more than a decade, this program has been the most important source of transparent and verifiable climate pollution data in the federal government, and the EPA has clear authority and obligation to continue maintaining it. Ending it would undermine lawful, evidence-based governance at precisely the moment when climate and energy challenges demand better information, not less. The elimination of the GHGRP represents yet another example of the Trump Administration’s censorship of scientific data, while simultaneously threatening statutory obligations, jeopardizing taxpayers’ ability to claim certain energy tax credits, weakening American competitiveness in global markets, and depriving American businesses and investors of the credible data they rely on for decision-making. These short-sighted partisan decisions from the Trump Administration will have long-term implications for the economic prosperity and wellbeing of our businesses and the American people.
EPA has clear legal authority and an obligation to maintain the GHGRP. The Consolidated Appropriations Acts for Fiscal Years 2008 and 2009 directed and funded EPA to promulgate and implement a greenhouse gas reporting rule covering “all sectors of the economy.” EPA did so relying on its broad authority under section 114 of the Clean Air Act, and has maintained the GHGRP since that time. The Agency’s new and unsupported view of its legal authority runs afoul of Congress’s clear direction and EPA’s own longstanding practice.
EPA’s proposal reflects a broad pattern of scientific data censorship under the Trump Administration as climate data is restricted, hidden, or defunded across the federal government. These actions have included funding cuts to researchers and scientists at the National Climate Assessment,the shutdown of the website for the U.S. Global Change Research Program, the elimination of Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Future Risk Index,the discontinuation of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Billion Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters database, the disabling of the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool, and significant censoring of hundreds of government websites related to climate change, among others. Suppressing scientific data does not make climate pollution or the systemic risk of climate change go away, it only blinds American policymakers, researchers, and the public to emerging threats and leaves our communities and families more vulnerable and defenseless.
The GHGRP is the backbone of the emissions verification needed to administer certain energy tax credits to American taxpayers. The GHGRP is indispensable to taxpayers in the energy industry, which rely on GHGRP data to verify eligibility for various federal tax incentives that support American industry. Without the GHGRP, even the American Petroleum Institute claims that major energy companies would lose the data infrastructure necessary to demonstrate compliance and claim these incentives, which would harm both American industry and our nation’s climate goals.
The GHGRP provides essential data that gives American manufacturing a competitive edge in rapidly innovating international markets. Eliminating this program would erode confidence in U.S. scientific data, drive up the cost of capital, and weaken American competitiveness just as the European Union, the United Kingdom, and other major economies adopt Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanisms (CBAMs) that reward verified low-emission manufacturing. For example, U.S.-produced low-emission steel and aluminum provide a clear market advantage relative to the high carbon intensity of materials produced in China, India, South Africa, and elsewhere. Without verifiable, trusted data like that provided by the GHGRP, the U.S. industry risks losing that global competitive advantage.
This data is equally vital as a business tool to investors and other stakeholders in the private sector, and is not easily replicable. EPA’s own website highlights GHGRP’s value as a business tool for cost-saving and risk management, noting that “data can be an important tool for businesses and other innovators to find cost- and fuel-saving efficiencies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions.”The Facility Level Information on GreenHouse gases Tool (FLIGHT) and other GHGRP datasets are widely used by companies, analysts, and investors to evaluate emissions performance and manage exposure to risks. Private companies also rely on the data to demonstrate the credibility of their emissions reduction strategies to investors and regulators. Ending federal reporting for greenhouse gases would shift the data-collection burden to the states or to less-equipped actors, fragmenting quality, raising costs, and eroding market trust.
Terminating the GHGRP would jeopardize key programs and reports that rely on this data to meet statutory obligations. In fact, EPA itself has long recognized the GHGRP’s importance to its own work, the work of other federal agencies, state and local programs, and to the private sector.
Given these concerns, we demand that EPA reverse course and maintain the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program. To that end, we request that EPA outline how it will ensure continuity and quality of the data, tools, and public reporting functions that American businesses, investors, states, and federal agencies rely upon for compliance, planning, and risk management.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. We look forward to your prompt response.