[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 17 (Monday, February 2, 2015)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E143]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             LNG PERMITTING CERTAINTY AND TRANSPARENCY ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                         HON. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN

                              of maryland

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, January 28, 2015

  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 351, which 
would create arbitrary and rigid deadlines for Department of Energy 
(DOE) approval of LNG exports. Rather than speeding up the approval 
process, this unnecessary legislation would likely force the Department 
to deny projects because they will not have the time to fully consider 
their impacts.
  The Department of Energy is one of two agencies that must approve LNG 
export terminals. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission must first 
approve the terminal infrastructure, and then DOE must consider whether 
or not each facility's exports are in the national interest. That DOE 
review encompasses a number of considerations, including the 
environmental and domestic energy price impacts.
  DOE has been working to refine this process and has approved several 
terminals, dramatically increasing the amount of LNG that will be 
exported from the United States. This shift in U.S. energy policy, from 
import to export, requires a complete review of the cumulative impact. 
For example, we should carefully monitor and control methane leakage 
along the natural gas supply chain, which has a potent impact on 
climate change. And a number of domestic manufacturers have expressed 
concern about the impact of exports on energy prices here at home.
  I am not opposed to some responsible expansion of LNG exports, but it 
must be done in a way that protects the environment and American 
taxpayers. The Department of Energy has been charged, rightly, with 
protecting the public interest in this process. We should not 
arbitrarily short-circuit that critical effort. I urge a no vote.

                          ____________________