Dive Brief:

• A proposal included in broad energy legislation currently being drafted in the House would undermine the President's ability to execute efficiency and carbon plans, according to an official from the Department of Energy.
• FERC officials have also expressed displeasure with the bill, parts of which they say duplicate already-existing efforts to ensure transparent and competitive markets.
• Both the House and Senate are working on broad energy legislation. The White House and Republicans have found common ground on the need to spend billions of dollars improving the nation's transmission and gas infrastructure.

Dive Insight:

Kathleen Hogan, the deputy assistant secretary for energy efficiency at the Energy Department, told a House subcommittee last week that proposals being considered as part of broader energy legislation would hinder the President's ability to set efficiency standards. 

While the White House does not have a formal position on the efficiency provisions in the legislation, Hogan said in prepared remarks that DOE "has a number of concerns with language that we believe undermines critical components of the President’s Climate Action Plan, including its ability to effectively set efficiency standards. In addition, we have concerns with the proposed building energy codes provisions."

The proposals have also drawn concern from FERC officials. One section of the bill would require federal regulators to establish an "Office of Compliance Assistance" to assist regulated entities with market rules. But officials at the agency said they already do what they can to assist companies and to ensure markets are efficient and transparent.

"It is important to recognize the duplication of effort and potential unintended consequences that could result from this proposed legislation," J. Arnold Quinn, director of FERC's Office of Energy Policy and Innovation, told the subcommittee.

But it does appear that the White House and GOP agree on the need to improve the country's gas and electric infrastructure, which could cost up to $5 billion. Most of that would go towards replacing aging natural gas pipeline and electric transmission infrastructure.

"Many people are even asking — not surprisingly — is there enough common ground between our efforts and the Obama administration to enact meaningful energy legislation?" said Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-KY), who chairs the subcommittee on energy and power, referring to the White House's first Quadrennial Energy Review, issued in April. "I do believe that this question was answered with a clear ‘yes.’"