The American Clean Power Association (ACP) encountered a challenging week in the political landscape of Washington, D.C., as its stance on key permitting legislation shifted, complicating its bipartisan ambitions. Despite efforts to align more closely with Republican lawmakers, the group has drawn criticism from both sides of the aisle.
Initially, ACP backed the “SPEED Act,” a legislative proposal by House Natural Resources Chair Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.) and Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine), aimed at reforming the National Environmental Policy Act’s permitting process. However, ACP withdrew its support after an amendment was introduced to address concerns from offshore wind opponents. The bill passed Thursday with backing from nearly all Republicans and 11 Democrats.
Golden, a moderate, criticized ACP’s change of heart as “awfully shortsighted,” emphasizing ongoing negotiations between the House and Senate on the permitting issue. A faction of conservatives and critics of offshore wind projects had resisted the “SPEED Act” due to a clause preventing the revocation of existing permits.
Westerman and Golden revised the bill to clarify that some offshore wind initiatives could still face permit revocations, a move intended to sustain legislative discussions. Republican energy lobbyist Mike McKenna remarked on ACP’s decision, saying, “It’s a hell of a small hill to die on. Why would you go to war over something that’s not going to happen?”
In a Thursday interview, ACP CEO Jason Grumet stated that the House’s actions had “fundamentally eviscerated the whole point of the legislation,” compelling ACP to retract its support. Other organizations like the Clean Energy Buyers Association and the National Ocean Industries Association expressed disappointment but maintained their positions.
Reactions and Implications
House Natural Resources Chair Bruce Westerman downplayed ACP’s withdrawal, stating, “We lost one. We didn’t lose a big bunch of our coalition that understood what’s going on with the ‘SPEED Act.’”
Discontent from the Left
The permitting issue also strained relationships with some of ACP’s Democratic allies. Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), a notable advocate for climate and renewable energy, expressed frustration with ACP’s collaboration with the oil industry on the “SPEED Act” via an angry post on X, writing, “Congratulations to ‘American Clean Power’ for cutting a deal with the American Petroleum Institute. But to enact a law both the House and the Senate have to agree, and Senators are finding out about this for the first time.”
Schatz, who was supposed to speak at an ACP board meeting that day, did not attend, citing tensions with the organization. He noted, “We had a rocky couple of weeks. We were not aligned. First rule in politics is no surprises, and I was surprised. Now we’re in a dialogue, and I’m confident it will be constructive. I don’t hold grudges, and I don’t think any of this should be taken personally. We just had to recalibrate.”
Grumet described the incident as a temporary “family” disagreement, emphasizing his belief in the legislative process. “The dance of legislation is a process,” he said.
Strategic Decisions and Challenges
Since taking over ACP in 2023, Grumet has aimed to build stronger ties with Republicans, though the association has faced setbacks under GOP leadership. The “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” threatened clean energy incentives, while the Trump administration pursued permit revocations.
Some renewable energy advocates, speaking anonymously, questioned ACP’s strategic decisions. A clean energy consultant remarked, “I have real questions about whether they’re up to the moment that we’ve been in for this entire year.” Another advocate noted that ACP’s withdrawal of endorsement from the “SPEED Act” puzzled many, describing it as choosing the “worst option.”
ACP’s incoming board chair, Dave Carroll of ENGIE North America, defended the organization’s stance, arguing the legislation’s changes allowed the administration to pick “winners and losers.” Grumet, unfazed by criticism, maintained, “Influence derives from integrity and clarity. Had we not expressed our disappointment, I think it would have undermined the integrity of our organization.”
Original Story at www.eenews.net