Analysis by Energy Workforce President Tim Tarpley
Congress is wrapping up its August district work period and plans to head back into session the week of September 9, after the Labor Day break. Strikingly, the House is only scheduled to be in session for eight weeks before the close of the year- when taking into account holiday weeks and an October that will be spent back home campaigning. In Congressional time, that is a relatively short window, especially when you consider that the NDAA and the end-of-year appropriations package still need to pass. Both of those will eat up at least 2-3 weeks of floor time. This Congress has been historically short on passing any large pieces of legislation of relevance; however, one major issue very important to all forms of energy, especially oil and gas, in the United States is still on the table.
Before the break, the Manchin-Barrasso “Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024” was introduced and passed out of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources committee by a bipartisan vote of 15-4 on August 2. The four no votes came from a bipartisan group including Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Ron Wyden (D-Ore), Mazie Hirono (D-HI) and Josh Hawley (R-MO), all with differing reasons for their opposition. The package is a true bipartisan compromise that combines reforms to transmission approvals to speed up the infrastructure necessary for renewable energy, as well as a number of provisions that will help with traditional oil and gas infrastructure construction. All forms of energy in the United States have said for years that the regulatory process for new infrastructure construction is incredibly slow and is hurting our ability to build new energy infrastructure at a rate that will be necessary to keep up with demand. Without action, America could quickly fall behind and soon be unable to keep up with demand, seriously jeopardizing our entire economy.
What are the chances that Congress could pass this important piece of legislation before the end of the year? Well, with only 8 weeks left and an election in November, a number of things will need to line up to get this across the finish line. So far, the most opposition appears to be coming from the left, from members who feel that compromise is too favorable to oil and gas. Included in the package is language requiring mandates for leasing offshore and a faster process for reviewing or denying permits for facilities that ship natural gas abroad. The bill also effectively ends the Biden administration’s LNG leasing “pause” by requiring the review of the LNG export process to go through a formal process, including a public comment period, and to use existing findings in the meantime, which would limit the ability to “slow walk” the process as we are seeing done now. There is also language to limit legal challenges to energy projects across the board and limit lawsuits to within 150 days of a project’s approval.
It is these provisions that have drawn the criticism of some of the more left-leaning members of the Senate. Both Senator Sanders and Senator Heinrich have said they believe these provisions will lead to a rise in carbon emissions, an analysis which (in my opinion) is flawed and does not fully take into account all of the facts of the larger energy system. It remains to be seen if these challenges to the bill on the left will be sufficient to stop its passage before the end of the year. There are also some on the right who have argued that a better package could be achieved next year when the numbers in the House and Senate may improve; however, given the tightening of the polls in recent weeks, it appears these voices may be more muted given the reality that a deal now is likely better than the uncertainty of a deal next year.
At the same time as the Senate package moves forward, Chairman Westerman and Rep. Peters are putting together their own NEPA-focused permitting reform package in the House. We expect this package to include language to limit lawsuits under NEPA and to have a broader scope than the Senate bill. Due to jurisdictional issues, the Senate package needed to remain within the Senate Energy Committee’s jurisdiction, so they were unable to include NEPA in that measure. The Westerman proposal, which has been in the works for many months, could complement the Senate Energy proposal. Perhaps, if the stars align right, it could even pass along the other package as part of a back-and-forth last-minute budget reconciliation negotiation between the House and Senate. This would happen in late December, if at all. This package could also serve as the framework for an entirely new attempt at the start of the next Congress in 2025. Both of these measures are extremely important not only to EWTC member companies but to the entire US energy system as a whole.
Tim Tarpley, Energy Workforce President, analyzes federal policy for the Energy Workforce & Technology Council. Click here to subscribe to the Energy Workforce newsletter, which highlights sector-specific issues, best practices, activities and more.
