PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 569.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jun 24, 2015
Ratepayer Protection Act of 2015
(Sec. 2) This bill extends compliance deadlines for rules under the Clean Air Act that address carbon dioxide emissions from existing fossil fuel-fired power plants pending final judicial review. This extension applies to any final rule that succeeds either:
the proposed rule entitled "Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units"; or
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
the supplemental proposed rule entitled "Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: EGUs in Indian Country and U.S. Territories; Multi-Jurisdictional Partnerships."
The extension period begins 60 days after the notice of promulgation of a final rule appears in the Federal Register and ends when the rule is no longer subject to judicial appeal or review.
The bill urges the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in promulgating, implementing, or enforcing the rules, to address how the megawatt hours discharged from a pumped hydroelectric storage system will be incorporated into implementation plans adopted pursuant to the rules.
(Sec. 3) A state is not required to submit or follow an implementation plan that addresses carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants if it determines that the plan would have a significant adverse effect on: (1) the state's residential, commercial, or industrial ratepayers; or (2) the reliability of the state's electricity system.
(Sec. 4) The EPA must treat hydropower as renewable energy when implementing or enforcing the rules.
People & committees
Rep. Whitfield, Ed [R-KY-1] · R–KY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 569.
Received in the Senate.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 247 - 180 (Roll no. 384).
House roll call 384 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 247 - 180 (Roll no. 384).
House roll call 384 · Individual votesThe previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H4632)
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 2042.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 333, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Newhouse amendment No. 5.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the McNerney amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. McNerney demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 333, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the McNerney amendment No. 4.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 333, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Huizenga amendment No. 3.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Rush amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Rush demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 333, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Rush amendment No. 2.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Pallone amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Pallone demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 333, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Pallone amendment No. 1.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 2042.
The Speaker designated the Honorable John J. Duncan, Jr. to act as Chairman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 333 and Rule XVIII.
Resolution provides for a modified open rule for H.R. 2822; a structured rule for H.R. 2042; and provides for proceedings of the House during the period from June 26, 2015, through July 6, 2015.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 333. (consideration: CR H4617-4633; text of amendment in the nature of a substitute CR H4624-4625)
Rule H. Res. 333 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 333 Reported to House. Resolution provides for a modified open rule for H.R. 2822; a structured rule for H.R. 2042; and provides for proceedings of the House during the period from June 26, 2015, through July 6, 2015.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 126.
Reported by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 114-171.
Reported by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 114-171.
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 28 - 22.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.2042 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.2042 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.2042 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.2042 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.