HB4172, titled the OCED Elimination Act, would abolish the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations (OCED) within the U.S. Department of Energy. The bill is brief and direct: it eliminates the office outright and repeals Section 41201 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which established the OCED framework in federal law.
By repealing the underlying statutory provision, the bill would remove the legal basis for OCED and its clean energy demonstration activities, likely affecting federal administration of demonstration projects, grant programs, and related DOE initiatives tied to that office. The measure would shift responsibility away from a dedicated clean energy demonstrations office and could alter or terminate programs authorized under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act that depend on OCED’s existence.
Impact
The bill would amend federal law by repealing Section 41201 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (42 U.S.C. 18861) and abolishing the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations at the Department of Energy. This would directly affect DOE’s organizational structure and any programs, funding streams, or demonstration efforts administered through OCED, with potential downstream effects on clean energy project sponsors, state and local partners, utilities, and private-sector recipients of federal demonstration support.
Sentiment
No committee transcript or vote record was provided, so there is no recorded debate or roll-call history to gauge support or opposition. Based on the bill’s sponsors and its purpose, the measure appears aligned with a deregulatory or anti-subsidy approach to federal clean energy policy, but the available record does not show broader committee sentiment. The bill was simply referred to the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely whether the federal government should maintain a dedicated office for clean energy demonstrations or eliminate it as unnecessary federal involvement. Supporters would likely argue that OCED duplicates other DOE functions or represents wasteful spending, while opponents would likely contend that abolishing the office would undermine clean energy deployment, innovation, and federally supported demonstration projects. No specific objections or endorsements are documented in the provided materials.
Recognizing that climate change poses a growing threat to public health and necessitates coordinated action to mitigate its impacts and safeguard the health and well-being of all people in the United States.