[House Report 118-19]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


118th Congress }                                         {   Rept. 118-19
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session    }                                         {        Part 2

======================================================================



 
               PROTECTING AMERICAN ENERGY PRODUCTION ACT

                                _______
                                

January 31, 2024.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

 Mr. Westerman, from the Committee on Natural Resources, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 1121]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 1121) to prohibit a moratorium on the use of 
hydraulic fracturing, having considered the same, reports 
favorably thereon without amendment and recommends that the 
bill do pass.

                       PURPOSE OF THE LEGISLATION

    The purpose of H.R. 1121 is to prohibit a moratorium on the 
use of hydraulic fracturing.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    Hydraulic fracturing (fracking) has had a transformative 
impact on the U.S. economy and the oil and gas sector, 
positioning the United States as one of the world's leading 
producers of natural gas and oil. The technique has been 
employed since 1947 but combined with the more recent advent of 
horizontal drilling, it has unlocked vast reserves of 
previously inaccessible hydrocarbons, leading to increased 
domestic production and reduced reliance on foreign energy 
sources. This surge in supply has contributed to lower energy 
prices for consumers, stimulating economic growth, and 
improving the quality of life for Americans.
    In 2015, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), under the 
Obama administration, finalized a regulation to address 
fracking on federal lands.\1\ However, the rule's effective 
date was postponed due to the issuance of a stay by a Wyoming 
federal judge\2\ and then was struck down by U.S. District 
Court Judge Scott Skavdahl in 2016.\3\ Judge Skavdahl's 
decision stated ``Congress has not delegated to the Department 
of the Interior the authority to regulate hydraulic fracturing. 
The BLM's effort to do so through the Fracking Rule is in 
excess of its statutory authority and contrary to law.''\4\ The 
regulation was formally revoked by the Trump administration in 
2017.\5\ Aside from its legal issues, the regulation was highly 
duplicative as it would have allowed the BLM to make unilateral 
decisions concerning state regulations and would have created 
unnecessary costs and delays for producers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\80 Fed. Reg. 16127 (2015), https://www.federalregister.gov/
documents/2015/03/26/2015-06658/oil-and-gas-hydraulic-fracturing-on-
federaland-indian-lands.
    \2\Order Postponing Effective Date of Agency Action, Wyoming v. 
Jewell, No. 15-043 (D.Wyo. June 24, 2015).
    \3\Case 2:15-cv-00043-SWS, 6/21/16, https://www.ipaa.org/wp-
content/uploads/2016/12/BLM-HF-Rule-Final-Agency-Action-
ReviewRuling.pdf.
    \4\Id.
    \5\82 Fed. Reg. 34464 (2017), https://www.federalregister.gov/
documents/2017/07/25/2017-15696/oil-and-gas-hydraulic-fracturing-on-
federaland-indian-lands-rescission-of-a-2015-rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    H.R. 1121 expresses a Sense a Congress that fracking should 
be regulated by states on state and private land, not the 
federal government through the BLM, while also preventing the 
Biden administration or future administrations from banning 
hydraulic fracturing without Congressional direction.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    H.R. 1121 was introduced on February 21, 2023, by Rep. Jeff 
Duncan (R-SC). The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Natural Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee 
on Energy and Mineral Resources. The bill was also referred to 
the Committee on Energy and Commerce. On September 28, 2023, 
the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources held a hearing 
on the bill. On November 8, 2023, the Committee on Natural 
Resources met to consider the bill. The Subcommittee on Energy 
and Mineral Resources was discharged from further consideration 
of H.R. 1121 by unanimous consent. Representative Sydney 
Kamlager-Dove (D-CA) offered an amendment designated Kamlager-
Dove #1. The amendment was not adopted by roll call vote of 18 
to 20 as follows:


    Representative Mike Levin (D-CA) offered an amendment 
designated Levin_050. The amendment was not adopted by roll 
call vote of 18 to 20 as follows:


    H.R. 1121 was ordered favorably reported to the House of 
Representatives by a roll call vote of 21 to 17, as follows:


                                HEARINGS

    For the purposes of clause 3(c)(6) of House rule XIII, the 
following hearing was used to develop or consider this measure: 
hearing by the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources 
held on September 28, 2023.

                      SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title

    Section 1 establishes the short title of the bill as the 
``Protecting American Energy Production Act''.

Section 2. Protecting American energy production

    Section 2 expresses a Sense of Congress that states should 
maintain primacy for regulating hydraulic fracturing on state 
and private lands. Prohibits the President from declaring a 
moratorium on the use of hydraulic fracturing unless authorized 
by Congress.

            COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

    Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee on Natural Resources' oversight findings and 
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.

           COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII AND CONGRESSIONAL 
                               BUDGET ACT

    1. Cost of Legislation and the Congressional Budget Act. 
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) and (3) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
sections 308(a) and 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974, the Committee has received the following estimate for the 
bill from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office:




    H.R. 1121 would prohibit the President from declaring a 
moratorium on hydraulic fracturing unless authorized to do so 
by law. (Hydraulic fracturing involves pumping liquids into the 
ground to generate cracks within geologic formations, 
facilitating access to oil and gas.)
    Under current law, states are the primary regulators for 
oil and natural gas production using hydraulic fracturing. 
Because there are currently no proposed or final federal 
regulations preventing its use, CBO estimates enacting H.R. 
1121 would not affect the federal budget.
    On March 23, 2023, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 
1, the Lower Energy Costs Act, as posted on the website of the 
House Committee on Rules on March 14, 2023. Section 10002 of 
H.R. 1 is similar to H.R. 1121 and CBO's estimates of the 
budgetary effects of those provisions are the same.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Lilia Ledezma. 
The estimate was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy 
Director of Budget Analysis.
                                         Phillip L. Swagel,
                             Director, Congressional Budget Office.

    2. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by 
clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or 
objective of this bill is to prohibit a moratorium on the use 
of hydraulic fracturing.

                           EARMARK STATEMENT

    This bill does not contain any Congressional earmarks, 
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined 
under clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives.

                 UNFUNDED MANDATES REFORM ACT STATEMENT

    According to the Congressional Budget Office, H.R. 1121 
contains no unfunded mandates as defined in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act.

                           EXISTING PROGRAMS

    Directed Rule Making. This bill does not contain any 
directed rule makings.
    Duplication of Existing Programs. This bill does not 
establish or reauthorize a program of the federal government 
known to be duplicative of another program. Such program was 
not included in any report from the Government Accountability 
Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139 
or identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic 
Assistance published pursuant to the Federal Program 
Information Act (Public Law 95-220, as amended by Public Law 
98-169) as relating to other programs.

                  APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.

                PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW

    Any preemptive effect of this bill over state, local, or 
tribal law is intended to be consistent with the bill's 
purposes and text and the Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the 
U.S. Constitution.

                        CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

    As ordered reported by the Committee on Natural Resources, 
H.R. 1121 makes no changes in existing law.

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

    H.R. 1121 would prohibit the President from declaring a 
moratorium on the use of hydraulic fracturing unless Congress 
specifically authorizes the moratorium. The bill was referred 
to the Committee on Natural Resources because the President has 
the authority to enact a moratorium on only federal land. The 
legislation also expresses the sense of Congress that the 
states should maintain primacy for the regulation of hydraulic 
fracturing for oil and natural gas production on state and 
private lands. The bill language was part of H.R. 1, 
Republicans' extreme industry giveaway known as the Polluters 
over People Act.
    Hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, is a method of 
extracting both oil and natural gas from deep underground. 
Fracking involves injecting a mixture of water, sand, and 
chemical additives into a well under enough pressure to 
fracture the formation and extract oil or natural gas. For the 
last 50-60 years, fracking has been used at the end of the life 
cycle of a well to extract the last remaining oil or gas from a 
deposit.\1\ Since around 2008, the use of fracking has become 
more widespread to extract oil or gas from tight rock, where 
fossil fuels were previously inaccessible. According to the 
Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 90 percent of the wells 
drilled on public lands were completed using fracking 
techniques in FY 2017.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\USGS, Hydraulic Fracturing, March 2, 2019 https://www.usgs.gov/
mission-areas/water-resources/science/hydraulic-fracturing.
    \2\BLM, Press Release, BLM Rescinds Rule on Hydraulic Fracturing, 
December 28, 2017 https://www.blm.gov/press-release/blm-rescinds-rule-
hydraulic-fracturing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 2015, the Obama administration published a rule 
regulating fracking on public lands.\3\ The rule was challenged 
in the U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming, struck 
down, and appealed.\4\ The District Court of Wyoming 
interpreted language in the Safe Drinking Water Act as implying 
that no federal agency has authority to regulate fracking.\5\ 
While on appeal, the Trump BLM rescinded the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\Federal Register, Oil and Gas; Hydraulic Fracturing on Federal 
and Indian Lands, March 26, 2015 https://www.federalregister.gov/
documents/2015/03/26/2015-06658/oil-and-gas-hydraulic-fracturing-on-
federal-and-indian-lands.
    \4\Wyoming v. U.S. Dep't of the Interior, No. 2:15-cv-00043.
    \5\Energy & Environmental Law Program, Harvard, Hydraulic 
Fracturing (Fracking) on Federal and Indian Lands, Last Accessed 
September 22, 2023 https://eelp.law.harvard.edu/2017/09/hydraulic-
fracturing-on-federal-and-indian-lands/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    There are many unknowns about the impact of fracking on 
public health and on the environment. Fracking fluid contains 
chemical additives like methanol, ethylene glycol, and 
propargyl alcohol--all considered hazardous to human health. 
Significant data gaps and uncertainties remain about the impact 
of fracking on drinking water. Spills, leaks, and injections of 
fracking fluid into inadequately built wells create the most 
significant risks. In addition, fracking can create earthquakes 
strong enough to cause property damage and injuries in states 
often ill-equipped to deal with seismic activity.\6\ Despite 
these risks, a Safe Water Drinking Act loophole prevents EPA 
from regulating fracking fluid unless it contains diesel.\7\ 
The president should have the full range of tools to protect 
public health and combat the climate crisis, including fracking 
bans, as necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\NRDC, Fracking 101, April 19, 2019 https://www.nrdc.org/stories/
fracking-101.
    \7\NRDC, Policy Basics, Fracking, February 2013 https://
www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/policy-basics-fracking-FS.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Raul M. Grijalva,
              Ranking Member, House Committee on Natural Resources.