Unleashing American Energy
January 20, 2025
Action Summary
- Objective: Unleash America’s domestic energy resources by eliminating burdensome, ideologically driven regulations that have increased energy costs, limited job creation, and weakened national security.
- Policy Direction (Sec. 2):
- Promote energy exploration and production on Federal lands and waters, including the Outer Continental Shelf.
- Establish U.S. leadership in non-fuel mineral production to bolster jobs, supply chains, and national security.
- Eliminate the “electric vehicle (EV) mandate” and remove regulatory barriers to protect consumer choice and promote market competition.
- Ensure that all energy regulations are well-grounded in clearly applicable law and that global costs are reported separately from domestic benefits.
- Regulatory Review (Sec. 3):
- Mandate immediate review of all agency actions that hinder the development of domestic energy resources.
- Agencies must develop action plans within 30 days to suspend, revise, or rescind these burdensome actions.
- Notify the Attorney General to protect ongoing litigation through stays or other relief where necessary.
- Revocation and Termination (Sec. 4):
- Revokes a series of executive orders (e.g., EOs 13990, 14008, 14007, etc.) and terminates the American Climate Corps.
- Redirects or disposes funds and assets associated with these abolished programs as permitted by law.
- Permitting Process Overhaul (Sec. 5):
- Revokes EO 11991 and calls for guidance to implement NEPA more efficiently, expediting permitting approvals.
- Directs multiple agencies to eliminate permitting delays and facilitate key infrastructure projects.
- Recommends streamlining judicial review of NEPA applications.
- Environmental Analysis & Methodology (Sec. 6):
- Agencies must adhere only to legislated environmental requirements, using robust, non-ideologically driven methodologies.
- Disbands the Interagency Working Group on the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases and withdraws its guidance.
- Directs the EPA to reassess and potentially eliminate the “social cost of carbon” calculation from permitting decisions.
- Green New Deal Funding (Sec. 7):
- Pauses disbursement of funds under the Inflation Reduction Act and Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
- Requires agencies to review and report on funding processes to ensure alignment with domestic energy policy.
- Prioritizes cost-effectiveness and American workforce in federal procurements and financial disbursements.
- National Security Measures (Sec. 8):
- Directs the Department of Energy to expedite reviews of liquefied natural gas export applications.
- Instructs the Maritime Administration to reassess deepwater port projects to ensure environmental impacts remain consistent with prior evaluations.
- Restoring Mineral Dominance (Sec. 9):
- Identifies and removes agency actions that burden domestic mining and processing of non-fuel minerals.
- Calls for reassessment of public lands withdrawals and updating the critical minerals list by the USGS.
- Requires analysis of national security implications and trade practices regarding mineral supplies.
- General Provisions (Sec. 10):
- Reaffirms that the order does not impair existing executive authorities and is subject to applicable law and appropriations.
- Clarifies that no party may enforce any right or benefit against the United States based on this order.
Risks & Considerations
- The Executive Order’s emphasis on energy exploration and production on federal lands and waters could lead to environmental concerns and potential conflicts with existing environmental policies. This may impact Vanderbilt’s research initiatives related to environmental science and sustainability.
- The revocation of previous executive orders related to climate change and environmental protection could affect funding and support for research in these areas, potentially impacting Vanderbilt’s programs focused on climate science and environmental policy.
- The elimination of the “electric vehicle (EV) mandate” and promotion of consumer choice in vehicles may influence research and development in sustainable transportation technologies, which could affect Vanderbilt’s engineering and technology programs.
- The focus on domestic energy resource development and the reduction of regulatory burdens may lead to changes in federal funding priorities, impacting grants and research opportunities for Vanderbilt in energy and environmental fields.
- The termination of the American Climate Corps and related programs may reduce opportunities for student engagement and internships in climate-related fields, affecting Vanderbilt’s career services and student development initiatives.
Impacted Programs
- Vanderbilt’s School of Engineering may need to adjust its research focus and partnerships in response to changes in federal energy policies and priorities.
- The College of Arts and Science, particularly departments focused on environmental science and policy, may experience shifts in research funding and collaboration opportunities.
- The Office of Sustainability at Vanderbilt may need to reassess its strategies and initiatives in light of changes to federal environmental policies and support structures.
- Vanderbilt’s Career Center might need to explore new partnerships and opportunities for students interested in energy and environmental careers, given the potential reduction in climate-related programs and initiatives.
Financial Impact
- The reallocation of federal funds away from climate and environmental initiatives could impact Vanderbilt’s ability to secure funding for related research projects and programs.
- Changes in federal energy policies may influence the availability of grants and funding for research in sustainable energy and technology, affecting Vanderbilt’s research portfolio and strategic priorities.
- Vanderbilt may need to explore alternative funding sources and partnerships to support its environmental and sustainability initiatives in response to shifts in federal priorities.
- The potential reduction in federal support for electric vehicle infrastructure and related technologies could impact Vanderbilt’s transportation and sustainability goals.
Relevance Score: 4 (The order presents a need for potential major changes or transformations of programs.)
Key Actions
- Vanderbilt’s School of Engineering should explore research opportunities in energy exploration and production technologies, particularly those related to non-fuel minerals and rare earth elements. This aligns with the executive order’s emphasis on establishing the U.S. as a leader in these areas.
- The Office of Federal Relations should monitor changes in federal regulations related to energy and environmental policies to identify potential impacts on university research funding and compliance requirements.
- Vanderbilt’s Law School could offer expertise in analyzing the legal implications of the revocation of previous executive orders related to climate change and environmental regulations, providing insights into potential legal challenges and opportunities.
- The Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences should consider expanding its research on the environmental impacts of energy production and mineral extraction, contributing to the national dialogue on sustainable practices.
- Vanderbilt’s Center for Technology Transfer and Commercialization should assess the potential for commercializing technologies that align with the executive order’s focus on energy efficiency and consumer choice in appliances and vehicles.
Opportunities
- The executive order presents an opportunity for Vanderbilt’s Peabody College to engage in policy research on the impacts of deregulation in the energy sector, potentially influencing future educational programs and policy recommendations.
- Vanderbilt can capitalize on the focus on energy dominance by developing partnerships with industry leaders in energy and mineral production, enhancing research collaborations and funding opportunities.
- The emphasis on efficient permitting processes offers an opportunity for Vanderbilt’s Public Policy Studies to analyze the effects of streamlined regulations on economic development and environmental protection.
- By engaging with federal agencies and policymakers, Vanderbilt can position itself as a leader in the national conversation on energy policy and innovation, hosting conferences and workshops to discuss the implications of the executive order.
Relevance Score: 4 (The order presents the potential for major process changes required for Vanderbilt’s programs due to impacts on research funding and regulatory compliance.)
Timeline for Implementation
- Within 1 day: The Secretary of the Interior must, per Sec. 4(b), submit a termination letter to all parties involved in the American Climate Corps Memorandum of Understanding.
- Within 30 days: Multiple agency actions are required to begin review, submit reports, or issue guidance (e.g., agency reviews in Sec. 3(b), CEQ guidance in Sec. 5(b), and several other specifications across the order). However, since the one‐day deadline is the shortest, it drives the assessment.
Relevance Score: 5
Impacted Government Organizations
- Office of Management and Budget (OMB): Tasked with coordinating agency reviews of regulations, guidance implementation, and recommendations to ensure compliance with the new permitting and fiscal directives.
- National Economic Council (NEC): Instructed to work with agency heads and the Director of OMB on formulating and implementing plans to eliminate burdensome regulations affecting domestic energy resources.
- Department of Justice – Attorney General: Required to be notified of agency steps regarding rescinding or revising regulations and to consider legal relief actions concerning pending litigation.
- Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ): Directed to provide expedited guidance on NEPA and to coordinate with other agencies to streamline permitting processes.
- Department of Energy (DoE): Instructed to restart and expedite reviews of liquified natural gas export projects, ensuring energy security and economic benefits.
- Department of the Interior: Charged with facilitating energy exploration on Federal lands, reviewing public lands withdrawals, and directing the U.S. Geological Survey regarding critical minerals.
- Department of Agriculture: Required to assess and assist in eliminating undue regulatory burdens on domestic resource development.
- Department of Commerce: Tasked with assessing national security implications related to mineral reliance and participating in interagency reporting on mining competitiveness.
- Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD): Identified among the agencies that must contribute to speeding up permitting processes and ensuring cost-effective Federal procurement.
- Department of Transportation (DOT): Along with related agencies, charged with efficient permitting especially regarding deepwater port licenses concerning LNG export projects.
- Department of Homeland Security (DHS): Instructed to eliminate delays and assess impacts that might affect national security, including evaluating forced labor and supply chain concerns in mineral imports.
- Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Directed to revise environmental analyses, provide guidance on the social cost of carbon, and participate in interagency efforts to streamline permitting and regulatory reviews.
- Department of Defense (DoD): Included among agencies that must act to eliminate delays in permitting for projects essential to the national economy and security.
- Maritime Administration (MARAD): Tasked with evaluating deepwater port project refinements and issuing determinations and subsequent licenses in coordination with the Secretary of Transportation.
- U.S. Geological Survey (USGS): Directed by the Secretary of the Interior to update the list of critical minerals, supporting domestic resource identification and mapping.
- United States Trade Representative (USTR): Charged with assessing international trade practices affecting domestic mineral and energy resource development.
- Department of Labor (DoL): Mentioned in the interagency report on enhancing American mining and refining competitiveness, thereby impacting labor policy considerations.
- Department of State (DOS): Instructed to consider international opportunities and collaborations (e.g., through the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue) to advance domestic mineral processing and energy resource policies.
Relevance Score: 5 (Directive applies across the entire government, impacting 18 agencies and multiple interagency processes.)
Responsible Officials
- Heads of All Agencies – Tasked with reviewing existing agency actions (including regulations, orders, and guidance) to identify and revise or rescind those that unduly burden domestic energy development, as well as pausing disbursement of certain funds and ensuring regulatory compliance.
- Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) – To be consulted by agency heads in developing action plans, to receive reports from agencies with no burdensome actions, and to coordinate guidelines regarding fund disbursement and regulatory reviews.
- Director of the National Economic Council (NEC) – Engaged in consultations with agency heads and OMB, and required to receive reports and jointly prepare recommendations regarding permitting and energy infrastructure.
- Attorney General – To be promptly notified by agencies regarding steps taken under the order and to consider legal relief (such as stays) in pending litigation impacted by agency actions.
- Secretary of the Interior – Responsible for terminating the American Climate Corps Memorandum of Understanding, reassessing public lands withdrawals, instructing the U.S. Geological Survey to update the critical minerals list, and accelerating geologic mapping efforts.
- Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) – Charged with providing expedited guidance on implementing NEPA, convening a working group to align agency-level regulations, and revising the permitting process.
- Secretaries of Defense, Agriculture, Commerce, Housing and Urban Development, Transportation, Energy, and Homeland Security – Directed to eliminate permitting delays and, in some cases, review or adjust agency regulations that affect energy, mineral resources, and national security.
- Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) – Required to issue guidance addressing the “social cost of carbon” and, in collaboration with other agency heads, to submit joint recommendations concerning environmental analyses.
- Director of the Office of Legislative Affairs – To jointly prepare recommendations with the Director of NEC for Congressional review on permitting and infrastructure projects.
- Secretary of Energy – Instructed to restart reviews of applications for liquefied natural gas export projects with attention to national security and economic impact.
- Administrator of the Maritime Administration (MARAD) – Charged with evaluating proposed refinements for deepwater LNG export projects under the Deepwater Port Act, and to coordinate determinations regarding environmental consequences.
- United States Trade Representative (USTR) – Directed to assess exploitative practices and state-assisted mineral projects abroad that might unduly burden U.S. commerce.
- Secretary of Homeland Security – Tasked with assessing the inflow of minerals suspected of being produced by forced labor and reporting the findings within 90 days.
- Secretary of Defense – Instructed to ensure that the National Defense Stockpile is adequately supplied with critical minerals to meet national security needs.
- Secretary of State – Required to consider opportunities (including through the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue) for advancing domestic mining and processing, and to submit a report—along with other secretaries and the USTR—to the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy on enhancing American mineral competitiveness.
- Secretary of Labor – Included with other officials in the reporting requirement aimed at enhancing the competitiveness of American mining and refining companies.
- Assistant to the President for Economic Policy – The final recipient of the joint report recommending policy changes to enhance domestic mineral competitiveness.
Relevance Score: 5 (Directives affect high-level officials including Cabinet secretaries, agency heads, and key White House officials).