,,iv  #aacth ,,congress  #ast ,session  
,h4 ,,con4 ,,res4 #eg  ,,in ,,the       
,,house ,,of ,,representatives          
,september #bj1 #bjac,mr4 ,rahall       
submitted the following concurrent      
resolution2 which was referred to the   
,committee on ,energy and ,commerce     
,,concurrent ,,resolution  ,expressing  
the opposition of the ,congress to the  
,environmental ,protection ,agency's    
proposed rule establishing new source   
performance standards to limit          
greenhouse gas emissions from new power 
plants4  ,whereas affordable1 abundant1 
reliable coal-fueled electric energy is 
essential to the ,nation's economy1     
jobs1 national security1 and energy     
independence2 ,whereas the              
,environmental ,protection ,agency has  
issued a proposed rule that would limit 
the ,nation's energy options and lead to
 increased power costs for ,american    
families and businesses2 ,whereas the   
proposed rule would be detrimental to   
the ,nation's coal mining regions and   

the livelihoods and well-being of       
,american coal miners1 their families1  
and their communities2 ,whereas the     
energy and environmental policies of the
 ,administration have stymied           
private-sector investment in new        
coal-fueled power plants1 undermining   
the integrity of economic assumptions on
 which the proposed rule is based2      
,whereas the ,administration has failed 
to provide sufficient funding and       
leadership to further the development   
and broad deployment of carbon capture  
and sequestration 7,,ccs7 technologies1 
and the only new power plants projected 
to be equipped to meet the standards    
under the proposed rule are those that  
incorporate federally funded ,,ccs      
technology2 ,whereas emissions caps in  
the proposed rule are expected to       
influence future caps on emissions from 
existing coal-fueled power plants1      
natural gas-fired power plants1 and     
manufacturers2 ,whereas worldwide       
consumption of coal is expected to      

increase among ,china1 ,india1 and other
 foreign competitor nations in the      
coming decades and the proposed rule    
will do nothing to address resulting    
increases in emissions from foreign     
sources2 and ,whereas proposed          
unilateral emissions caps would stifle  
the ,nation's growth1 contribute to     
trade disadvantages1 undermine the      
,nation's international competitiveness1
 and contribute to the loss of ,american
 jobs3 ,now1 therefore1 be it ,that the 
,congress opposes the ,environmental    
,protection ,agency's rule establishing 
new source performance standards to     
limit greenhouse gas emissions from new 
power plants4