[House Report 118-23]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


118th Congress   }                                         {    Report
                          HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session     }                                         {    118-23

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

 
PROMOTING INTERAGENCY COORDINATION FOR REVIEW OF NATURAL GAS PIPELINES 
                                  ACT

                                _______
                                

 March 23, 2023.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

Mrs. Rodgers of Washington, from the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                             MINORITY VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 1115]

    The Committee on Energy and Commerce, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 1115) to provide for Federal and State agency 
coordination in the approval of certain authorizations under 
the Natural Gas Act, and for other purposes, having considered 
the same, reports favorably thereon with an amendment and 
recommends that the bill as amended do pass.
    The amendment is as follows:
  Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

  This Act may be cited as the ``Promoting Interagency Coordination for 
Review of Natural Gas Pipelines Act''.

SEC. 2. FERC PROCESS COORDINATION FOR NATURAL GAS PIPELINE PROJECTS.

  (a) Definitions.--In this section:
          (1) Commission.--The term ``Commission'' means the Federal 
        Energy Regulatory Commission.
          (2) Federal authorization.--The term ``Federal 
        authorization'' has the meaning given that term in section 
        15(a) of the Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717n(a)).
          (3) NEPA review.--The term ``NEPA review'' means the process 
        of reviewing a proposed Federal action under section 102 of the 
        National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332).
          (4) Project-related nepa review.--The term ``project-related 
        NEPA review'' means any NEPA review required to be conducted 
        with respect to the issuance of an authorization under section 
        3 of the Natural Gas Act or a certificate of public convenience 
        and necessity under section 7 of such Act.                        
  (b) Commission NEPA Review Responsibilities.--In acting as the lead 
agency under section 15(b)(1) of the Natural Gas Act for the purposes 
of complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) with respect to an authorization under section 3 
of the Natural Gas Act or a certificate of public convenience and 
necessity under section 7 of such Act, the Commission shall, in 
accordance with this section and other applicable Federal law--
          (1) be the only lead agency;
          (2) coordinate as early as practicable with each agency 
        designated as a participating agency under subsection (d)(3) to 
        ensure that the Commission develops information in conducting 
        its project-related NEPA review that is usable by the 
        participating agency in considering an aspect of an application 
        for a Federal authorization for which the agency is 
        responsible; and
          (3) take such actions as are necessary and proper to 
        facilitate the expeditious resolution of its project-related 
        NEPA review.
  (c) Deference to Commission.--In making a decision with respect to a 
Federal authorization required with respect to an application for 
authorization under section 3 of the Natural Gas Act or a certificate 
of public convenience and necessity under section 7 of such Act, each 
agency shall give deference, to the maximum extent authorized by law, 
to the scope of the project-related NEPA review that the Commission 
determines to be appropriate.
  (d) Participating Agencies.--
          (1) Identification.--The Commission shall identify, not later 
        than 30 days after the Commission receives an application for 
        an authorization under section 3 of the Natural Gas Act or a 
        certificate of public convenience and necessity under section 7 
        of such Act, any Federal or State agency, local government, or 
        Indian Tribe that may issue a Federal authorization or is 
        required by Federal law to consult with the Commission in 
        conjunction with the issuance of a Federal authorization 
        required for such authorization or certificate.
          (2) Invitation.--
                  (A) In general.--Not later than 45 days after the 
                Commission receives an application for an authorization 
                under section 3 of the Natural Gas Act or a certificate 
                of public convenience and necessity under section 7 of 
                such Act, the Commission shall invite any agency 
                identified under paragraph (1) to participate in the 
                review process for the applicable Federal 
                authorization.
                  (B) Deadline.--An invitation issued under 
                subparagraph (A) shall establish a deadline by which a 
                response to the invitation shall be submitted to the 
                Commission, which may be extended by the Commission for 
                good cause.
          (3) Designation as participating agencies.--Not later than 60 
        days after the Commission receives an application for an 
        authorization under section 3 of the Natural Gas Act or a 
        certificate of public convenience and necessity under section 7 
        of such Act, the Commission shall designate an agency 
        identified under paragraph (1) as a participating agency with 
        respect to an application for authorization under section 3 of 
        the Natural Gas Act or a certificate of public convenience and 
        necessity under section 7 of such Act unless the agency informs 
        the Commission, in writing, by the deadline established 
        pursuant to paragraph (2)(B), that the agency--
                  (A) has no jurisdiction or authority with respect to 
                the applicable Federal authorization;
                  (B) has no special expertise or information relevant 
                to any project-related NEPA review; or
                  (C) does not intend to submit comments for the record 
                for the project-related NEPA review conducted by the 
                Commission.
          (4) Effect of non-designation.--
                  (A) Effect on agency.--Any agency that is not 
                designated as a participating agency under paragraph 
                (3) with respect to an application for an authorization 
                under section 3 of the Natural Gas Act or a certificate 
                of public convenience and necessity under section 7 of 
                such Act may not request or conduct a NEPA review that 
                is supplemental to the project-related NEPA review 
                conducted by the Commission, unless the agency--
                          (i) demonstrates that such review is legally 
                        necessary for the agency to carry out 
                        responsibilities in considering an aspect of an 
                        application for a Federal authorization; and
                          (ii) requires information that could not have 
                        been obtained during the project-related NEPA 
                        review conducted by the Commission.
                  (B) Comments; record.--The Commission shall not, with 
                respect to an agency that is not designated as a 
                participating agency under paragraph (3) with respect 
                to an application for an authorization under section 3 
                of the Natural Gas Act or a certificate of public 
                convenience and necessity under section 7 of such Act--
                          (i) consider any comments or other 
                        information submitted by such agency for the 
                        project-related NEPA review conducted by the 
                        Commission; or
                          (ii) include any such comments or other 
                        information in the record for such project-
                        related NEPA review.
  (e) Water Quality Impacts.--
          (1) In general.--Notwithstanding section 401 of the Federal 
        Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1341), an applicant for 
        a Federal authorization shall not be required to provide a 
        certification under such section with respect to the Federal 
        authorization.
          (2) Coordination.--With respect to any NEPA review for a 
        Federal authorization to conduct an activity that will directly 
        result in a discharge into the navigable waters (within the 
        meaning of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act), the 
        Commission shall identify as an agency under subsection (d)(1) 
        the State in which the discharge originates or will originate, 
        or, if appropriate, the interstate water pollution control 
        agency having jurisdiction over the navigable waters at the 
        point where the discharge originates or will originate.
          (3) Proposed conditions.--A State or interstate agency 
        designated as a participating agency pursuant to paragraph (2) 
        may propose to the Commission terms or conditions for inclusion 
        in an authorization under section 3 of the Natural Gas Act or a 
        certificate of public convenience and necessity under section 7 
        of such Act that the State or interstate agency determines are 
        necessary to ensure that any activity described in paragraph 
        (2) conducted pursuant to such authorization or certification 
        will comply with the applicable provisions of sections 301, 
        302, 303, 306, and 307 of the Federal Water Pollution Control 
        Act.
          (4) Commission consideration of conditions.--The Commission 
        may include a term or condition in an authorization under 
        section 3 of the Natural Gas Act or a certificate of public 
        convenience and necessity under section 7 of such Act proposed 
        by a State or interstate agency under paragraph (3) only if the 
        Commission finds that the term or condition is necessary to 
        ensure that any activity described in paragraph (2) conducted 
        pursuant to such authorization or certification will comply 
        with the applicable provisions of sections 301, 302, 303, 306, 
        and 307 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
  (f) Schedule.--
          (1) Deadline for federal authorizations.--A deadline for a 
        Federal authorization required with respect to an application 
        for authorization under section 3 of the Natural Gas Act or a 
        certificate of public convenience and necessity under section 7 
        of such Act set by the Commission under section 15(c)(1) of 
        such Act shall be not later than 90 days after the Commission 
        completes its project-related NEPA review, unless an applicable 
        schedule is otherwise established by Federal law.
          (2) Concurrent reviews.--Each Federal and State agency--
                  (A) that may consider an application for a Federal 
                authorization required with respect to an application 
                for authorization under section 3 of the Natural Gas 
                Act or a certificate of public convenience and 
                necessity under section 7 of such Act shall formulate 
                and implement a plan for administrative, policy, and 
                procedural mechanisms to enable the agency to ensure 
                completion of Federal authorizations in compliance with 
                schedules established by the Commission under section 
                15(c)(1) of such Act; and
                  (B) in considering an aspect of an application for a 
                Federal authorization required with respect to an 
                application for authorization under section 3 of the 
                Natural Gas Act or a certificate of public convenience 
                and necessity under section 7 of such Act, shall--
                          (i) formulate and implement a plan to enable 
                        the agency to comply with the schedule 
                        established by the Commission under section 
                        15(c)(1) of such Act;
                          (ii) carry out the obligations of that agency 
                        under applicable law concurrently, and in 
                        conjunction with, the project-related NEPA 
                        review conducted by the Commission, and in 
                        compliance with the schedule established by the 
                        Commission under section 15(c)(1) of such Act, 
                        unless the agency notifies the Commission in 
                        writing that doing so would impair the ability 
                        of the agency to conduct needed analysis or 
                        otherwise carry out such obligations;
                          (iii) transmit to the Commission a 
                        statement--
                                  (I) acknowledging receipt of the 
                                schedule established by the Commission 
                                under section 15(c)(1) of the Natural 
                                Gas Act; and
                                  (II) setting forth the plan 
                                formulated under clause (i) of this 
                                subparagraph;
                          (iv) not later than 30 days after the agency 
                        receives such application for a Federal 
                        authorization, transmit to the applicant a 
                        notice--
                                  (I) indicating whether such 
                                application is ready for processing; 
                                and
                                  (II) if such application is not ready 
                                for processing, that includes a 
                                comprehensive description of the 
                                information needed for the agency to 
                                determine that the application is ready 
                                for processing;
                          (v) determine that such application for a 
                        Federal authorization is ready for processing 
                        for purposes of clause (iv) if such application 
                        is sufficiently complete for the purposes of 
                        commencing consideration, regardless of whether 
                        supplemental information is necessary to enable 
                        the agency to complete the consideration 
                        required by law with respect to such 
                        application; and
                          (vi) not less often than once every 90 days, 
                        transmit to the Commission a report describing 
                        the progress made in considering such 
                        application for a Federal authorization.
          (3) Failure to meet deadline.--If a Federal or State agency, 
        including the Commission, fails to meet a deadline for a 
        Federal authorization set forth in the schedule established by 
        the Commission under section 15(c)(1) of the Natural Gas Act, 
        not later than 5 days after such deadline, the head of the 
        relevant Federal agency (including, in the case of a failure by 
        a State agency, the Federal agency overseeing the delegated 
        authority) shall notify Congress and the Commission of such 
        failure and set forth a recommended implementation plan to 
        ensure completion of the action to which such deadline applied.
  (g) Consideration of Applications for Federal Authorization.--
          (1) Issue identification and resolution.--
                  (A) Identification.--Federal and State agencies that 
                may consider an aspect of an application for a Federal 
                authorization shall identify, as early as possible, any 
                issues of concern that may delay or prevent an agency 
                from working with the Commission to resolve such issues 
                and granting such authorization.
                  (B) Issue resolution.--The Commission may forward any 
                issue of concern identified under subparagraph (A) to 
                the heads of the relevant agencies (including, in the 
                case of an issue of concern that is a failure by a 
                State agency, the Federal agency overseeing the 
                delegated authority, if applicable) for resolution.
          (2) Remote surveys.--If a Federal or State agency considering 
        an aspect of an application for a Federal authorization 
        requires the person applying for such authorization to submit 
        data, the agency shall consider any such data gathered by 
        aerial or other remote means that the person submits. The 
        agency may grant a conditional approval for the Federal 
        authorization based on data gathered by aerial or remote means, 
        conditioned on the verification of such data by subsequent 
        onsite inspection.
          (3) Application processing.--The Commission, and Federal and 
        State agencies, may allow a person applying for a Federal 
        authorization to fund a third-party contractor to assist in 
        reviewing the application for such authorization.
  (h) Accountability, Transparency, Efficiency.--For an application for 
an authorization under section 3 of the Natural Gas Act or a 
certificate of public convenience and necessity under section 7 of such 
Act that requires multiple Federal authorizations, the Commission, with 
input from any Federal or State agency considering an aspect of the 
application, shall track and make available to the public on the 
Commission's website information related to the actions required to 
complete the Federal authorizations. Such information shall include the 
following:
          (1) The schedule established by the Commission under section 
        15(c)(1) of the Natural Gas Act.
          (2) A list of all the actions required by each applicable 
        agency to complete permitting, reviews, and other actions 
        necessary to obtain a final decision on the application.
          (3) The expected completion date for each such action.
          (4) A point of contact at the agency responsible for each 
        such action.
          (5) In the event that an action is still pending as of the 
        expected date of completion, a brief explanation of the reasons 
        for the delay.

SEC. 3. PIPELINE SECURITY.

  In considering an application for an authorization under section 3 of 
the Natural Gas Act or a certificate of public convenience and 
necessity under section 7 of such Act, the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission shall consult with the Administrator of the Transportation 
Security Administration regarding the applicant's compliance with 
security guidance and best practice recommendations of the 
Administration regarding pipeline infrastructure security, pipeline 
cybersecurity, pipeline personnel security, and other pipeline security 
measures.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Purpose and Summary..............................................     5
Background and Need for Legislation..............................     5
Committee Action.................................................     6
Committee Votes..................................................     7
Oversight Findings and Recommendations...........................    12
New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures    12
Congressional Budget Office Estimate.............................    12
Federal Mandates Statement.......................................    12
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives............    12
Duplication of Federal Programs..................................    12
Related Committee and Subcommittee Hearings......................    12
Committee Cost Estimate..........................................    13
Earmark, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff Benefits.......    13
Advisory Committee Statement.....................................    13
Applicability to Legislative Branch..............................    13
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation...................    14
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............    16
Minority Views...................................................    17

                          PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

    H.R. 1115, the ``Promoting Interagency Coordination for 
Review of Natural Gas Pipelines Act,'' was introduced by 
Representative Burgess (R-TX) on February 21, 2023. The 
legislation would help address the critical need to expand and 
modernize the nation's natural gas pipeline infrastructure by 
promoting more timely and efficient reviews.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is the 
principal Federal agency involved in the review of interstate 
natural gas pipelines. FERC has exclusive authority under 
section 7 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) to review and grant the 
certificate of public convenience and necessity required to 
construct a new or expanded interstate natural gas pipeline. 
FERC conducts the environmental review of each proposed natural 
gas pipeline project as required under the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Under the Energy Policy Act of 
2005 (EPAct), FERC is designated as the lead agency for 
coordinating necessary environmental reviews and associated 
Federal authorizations. As the lead agency, FERC often 
coordinates with a variety of Federal, State, and local 
governments and Indian tribes to balance a wide range of 
issues, including potential impacts on environmental and 
wildlife resources, land-use, and property rights.
    Multiple permits are often required for a natural gas 
pipeline project, including permits under the Clean Water Act 
(CWA), Endangered Species Act (ESA), and Clean Air Act (CAA). 
Under current FERC regulations, Federal and State agencies 
participate in the development of the NEPA analysis for a 
pipeline project and then are required to complete their 
respective permit application reviews no later than 90 days 
after FERC issues its final environmental document, unless 
another schedule is established by Federal law.
    Despite the increased authority given to FERC under EPAct, 
there is growing evidence that pipeline infrastructure 
approvals are being delayed unnecessarily due to a lack of 
coordination or insufficient action among agencies involved in 
the permitting process. It has also become apparent that 
inadequate infrastructure to transport natural gas has 
negatively affected electric grid reliability and electric 
rates, especially in New England states, as natural gas-fired 
power plants have had difficulty accessing the fuel they need 
to maintain operations. Furthermore, the lack of pipeline 
capacity in the Northeast, especially during times of high 
demand in winter months, has resulted in the region becoming 
dangerously dependent on liquefied natural gas (LNG) imports, 
including from Russia.
    There are numerous large natural gas pipelines that would 
have carried billions of cubic feet of natural gas per day and 
served tens of millions of customers that have been cancelled 
in recent years due to permitting challenges and delays.\1\ 
While FERC is partly responsible, some States, such as New 
York, have weaponized their Federally delegated 
responsibilities under CWA Section 401 to veto pipeline 
construction projects for reasons unrelated to water quality.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\E.g., Atlantic Coast Pipeline, Constitution Pipeline, Northeast 
Supply Direct, and Penn East Pipeline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    H.R. 1115 would improve the permitting process for natural 
gas pipelines by strengthening the lead agency role of FERC and 
further defining the process for participating Federal and 
State agencies. The intent of these provisions is to involve 
stakeholders sooner so that they can be involved in the setting 
of the schedule and identify issues of concern earlier in the 
process. The legislation would require agencies that may 
consider an aspect of an application to participate in the 
review process and comply with the schedules established by 
FERC. The legislation requires that agencies conduct their 
respective reviews concurrently, and in conjunction with, the 
project-related review conducted by FERC in compliance with 
NEPA. In considering an aspect of an application, Federal and 
State agencies may accept remote aerial survey data and use 
that data to grant conditional approvals, conditioned on the 
onsite inspection. Remote aerial surveys are a widely accepted, 
proven method of collecting environmental data, and allowing 
their use will lead to better, more informed decisions.
    H.R. 1115 would increase public accountability, 
transparency, and efficiency by requiring FERC to publish the 
schedule, a list of all actions required by each applicable 
agency, and the status of all pending actions. The legislation 
also contains a provision that would improve the water quality 
review by shifting the responsibility from the States to FERC. 
Under H.R. 1115, an applicant for a Federal authorization for 
an interstate pipeline would not be required to obtain a CWA 
Sec. 401 certification from a State. Instead, FERC would 
incorporate the water quality certification into its NEPA 
review, with necessary terms or conditions proposed by the 
States participating in the review process.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    On January 31, 2023, the House Committee on Energy and 
Commerce held a full committee oversight hearing on ``American 
Energy Expansion: Strengthening Economic, Environmental, and 
National Security.'' The Committee received testimony from:
           The Honorable Paul Dabbar, Former Under 
        Secretary of Energy; Distinguished Visiting Fellow, 
        Center on Global Energy Policy, Columbia University; 
        CEO, Bohr Quantum Technology; and
           Mr. Robert McNally, President, Rapidan 
        Energy Group; and
           Ms. Donna Jackson, Director of Membership 
        Development, National Center for Public Policy 
        Research, Project 21; and
           Dr. Ana Unruh Cohen, Former Majority Staff 
        Director, U.S. House Select Committee on the Climate 
        Crisis.
    On February 7, 2023, the Subcommittees on Energy, Climate, 
and Grid Security and Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical 
Materials held a legislative hearing on 17 pieces of 
legislation, including H.R. 1115. The Subcommittees received 
testimony from:
           The Honorable Mark Menezes, Former United 
        States Deputy Secretary of Energy, Principal at Global 
        Sustainable Energy Advisors, LLC, and Adjunct 
        Professor, Georgetown Law School; and
           The Honorable Bernard McNamee, former 
        Commissioner at the Federal Energy Regulatory 
        Commission, Partner at McGuire Woods; and
           Jeffrey Eshelman, President and CEO, 
        Independent Petroleum Association of America; and
           Katie Sweeney, Executive Vice President and 
        COO, National Mining Association; and
           Raul Garcia, Legislative Director for 
        Healthy Communities, Earthjustice; and
           Tyson Slocum, Director of the Energy 
        Program, Public Citizen.
    On February 28, 2023, the Subcommittee on Energy, Climate, 
and Grid Security met in open markup session and forwarded H.R. 
1115, as amended, to the full Committee by a record vote of 13 
yeas and 8 nays.
    On March 9, 2023, the full Committee on Energy and Commerce 
met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 1115, as amended, 
favorably reported to the House by a record vote of 27 yeas and 
23 nays.

                            COMMITTEE VOTES

    Clause 3(b) of rule XIII requires the Committee to list the 
record votes on the motion to report legislation and amendments 
thereto. The following reflects the record votes taken during 
the Committee consideration:

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

    Pursuant to clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of 
rule XIII, the Committee held hearings and made findings that 
are reflected in this report.

   NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY, ENTITLEMENT AUTHORITY, AND TAX EXPENDITURES

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII, the Committee 
finds that H.R. 1115 would result in no new or increased budget 
authority, entitlement authority, or tax expenditures or 
revenues.

                  CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII, at the time this 
report was filed, the cost estimate prepared by the Director of 
the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 was not available.

                       FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT

    The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal 
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act.

         STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general 
performance goal or objective of this legislation is to 
increase American energy production and restore energy 
leadership by helping to address the critical need to expand 
and modernize the nation's natural gas pipeline infrastructure 
by promoting more timely and efficient reviews.

                    DUPLICATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(5) of rule XIII, no provision of 
H.R. 1115 is known to be duplicative of another Federal 
program, including any program that was included in a report to 
Congress pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139 or the 
most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance.

              RELATED COMMITTEE AND SUBCOMMITTEE HEARINGS

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(6) of rule XIII,
    (1) the following hearings were used to develop or consider 
H.R. 1115:
    On January 31, 2023, the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
held an oversight hearing entitled, ``American Energy 
Expansion: Strengthening Economic, Environmental, and National 
Security.'' The Committee received testimony from:
           The Honorable Paul Dabbar, Former Under 
        Secretary of Energy, Department of Energy;
           Robert McNalley, President, Rapidan Energy 
        Group, LLC;
           Donna Jackson, Director of Membership 
        Development--National Center for Public Policy 
        Research, Project 21; and
           Ana Unruh Cohen, Former Majority Staff 
        Director, U.S. House Select Committee on the Climate 
        Crisis.
    On February 16, 2023, the Subcommittee on Energy, Climate, 
and Grid Security held a field hearing in Midland, Texas, 
entitled, ``American Energy Expansion: Improving Local 
Economies and Communities'' Way of Life.'' The Committee 
received testimony from:
           The Honorable Lori Blong, Mayor of Midland, 
        Texas, and President of Octane Energy;
           Adrian Carrasco, Chairman Midland Hispanic 
        Chamber of Commerce, and President of Premier Energy 
        Services;
           Steven Pruett, President and CEO, Elevation 
        Resources, and Chairman of the Board for Independent 
        Petroleum Association of America; and
           Dr. Michael Zavada, Professor of Biology and 
        Geosciences, and Chair, Department of Geosciences at 
        The University of Texas--Permian Basin.
    (2) The following related hearing was held:
    On February 7, 2023, the Subcommittees on Energy, Climate, 
and Grid Security and Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical 
Materials held a joint hearing entitled, ``Unleashing American 
Energy, Lowering Energy Costs, and Strengthening Supply 
Chains,'' on 17 pieces of legislation, including H.R. 1121. The 
Subcommittees received testimony from:
           The Honorable Mark Menezes, Former United 
        States Deputy Secretary of Energy, Department of 
        Energy;
           The Honorable Bernard McNamee, Former 
        Commissioner, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission;
           Jeffrey Eshelman, II, President and Chief 
        Executive Officer, Independent Petroleum Association of 
        America;
           Katie Sweeney, Executive Vice President and 
        Chief Operating Officer, National Mining Association;
           Raul Garcia, Legislative Director for 
        Healthy Communities, Earthjustice; and
           Tyson Slocum, Director of the Energy 
        Program, Public Citizen.

                        COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE

    Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII, the Committee 
adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared by the Director of 
the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974. At the time this report was 
filed, the estimate was not available.

       EARMARK, LIMITED TAX BENEFITS, AND LIMITED TARIFF BENEFITS

    Pursuant to clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI, the 
Committee finds that H.R. 1115 contains no earmarks, limited 
tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits.

                      ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

    No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) 
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this 
legislation.

                  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.

             SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION

Section 1. Short title

    This section provides the short title, the ``Promoting 
Interagency Coordination for Review of Natural Gas Pipelines 
Act.''

Section 2. FERC process coordination for natural gas pipeline projects

    Section 2(a) provides definitions for terms used throughout 
this section.
    Section 2(b) designates FERC as the only lead agency for 
the purposes of complying with NEPA for an authorization under 
section 3 of the NGA or a certificate of public convenience and 
necessity under section 7 of the NGA. This section requires 
FERC to coordinate as early as practicable with each agency 
designated as a participating agency under subsection (d)(3) 
and to take such actions as necessary and proper to facilitate 
the expeditious resolution of its project-related NEPA review.
    Section 2(c) directs each agency to give deference, to the 
maximum extent authorized by law, to the scope of the project-
related NEPA review that FERC determines to be appropriate, 
when making a decision with respect to a Federal authorization 
under section 3 of the NGA or a certificate of public 
convenience and necessity under section 7 of the NGA.
    Section 2(d)(1) requires FERC to identify as early as 
practicable, after it is notified by a person applying for an 
authorization under section 3 of the NGA or a certificate of 
public convenience and necessity under section 7 of the NGA, 
any Federal or State agency, local government, or Indian Tribe 
that may issue a Federal authorization or is required by 
Federal law to consult with FERC on the issuance of a Federal 
authorization.
    Section 2(d)(2) requires FERC to invite the identified 
agencies to participate in the review process for the 
applicable Federal authorization. The invitation shall 
establish a deadline for when the agency must submit a response 
to FERC. FERC may extend the deadline for good cause.
    Section 2(d)(3) requires FERC to designate identified 
agencies as participating agencies with respect to an 
application for authorization under section 3 of the NGA or a 
certificate of public convenience and necessity under section 7 
of the NGA, unless the agency informs FERC, in writing, that 
the agency does not have jurisdiction over the application, has 
no special expertise relevant to the NEPA review, and does not 
intend to submit comments for the record for the NEPA review 
conducted by FERC.
    Section 2(d)(4) provides that any agency not designated as 
a participating agency may not request or conduct a NEPA review 
that is supplemental to FERC's project-related NEPA review, 
unless the agency (1) demonstrates that such review is legally 
necessary or (2) requires information that could not have been 
obtained during FERC's project-related NEPA review. 
Additionally, it directs FERC not to consider any comments or 
other information submitted by an agency that is not designated 
as a participating agency for FERC's project-related NEPA 
review and not to include any comments in the record for the 
Commission's NEPA review from an agency that is not designated 
as a participating agency.
    Section 2(e)(1) provides that an applicant for a Federal 
authorization under the NGA shall not be required to provide a 
certification under Section 401 of the Federal Water Pollution 
Control Act.
    Section 2(e)(2) requires FERC to coordinate its NEPA review 
as necessary with States where a potential discharge into 
navigable waters may occur.
    Section 2(e)(3) allows for States to propose conditions to 
FERC to protect water resources.
    Section 2(e)(4) allows for FERC to include terms or 
conditions proposed by a State.
    Section 2(f)(1) directs the Commission not to establish a 
deadline for a Federal authorization exceeding 90 days after 
the Commission completes its project-related NEPA review.
    Section 2(f)(2) directs each Federal and State agency 
considering a Federal authorization for an application or an 
aspect of an application under section 3 of the NGA or a 
certificate of public convenience and necessity under section 7 
of NGA to formulate and implement a plan to ensure completion 
of Federal authorizations in compliance with schedules 
established by FERC. When considering an aspect of an 
application for a Federal authorization, each Federal and State 
agency shall carry out the obligations of that agency under 
applicable law concurrently with FERC's project-related NEPA 
review, and in compliance with FERC's established schedule, 
unless the agency notifies FERC in writing that doing so would 
impair the ability of the agency to conduct needed analysis or 
otherwise carry out the agency's obligations. Each Federal and 
State agency considering an aspect of a Federal authorization 
shall transmit to FERC a statement acknowledging receipt of the 
schedule established by FERC. The statement shall also contain 
the plan formulated to ensure completion of the Federal 
authorizations in compliance with FERC's schedule. Not later 
than 30 days after the agency receives an application for a 
Federal authorization under section 3 of the NGA or a 
certificate of public convenience and necessity under section 7 
the NGA, a Federal or State agency shall transmit to the 
applicant a notice indicating whether the application is ready 
for processing. If the application is not ready for processing, 
the agency shall provide a comprehensive description to the 
applicant of the information needed for the agency to determine 
that the application is ready for processing. Each Federal and 
State agency shall transmit to FERC a report once every 90 days 
describing the progress made in considering an application. 
Section 2(e)(3) specifies that if a Federal or State agency 
fails to meet a deadline for a Federal authorization set forth 
in FERC's schedule, the head of the relevant Federal agency 
shall notify Congress and FERC of such failure and set forth a 
recommended implementation plan to ensure completion of the 
action.
    Section 2(g)(1) directs Federal and State agencies 
considering an aspect of an application for a Federal 
authorization to identify any issues of concern that may delay 
or prevent an agency from working with FERC to resolve the 
identified issues and grant the authorization. FERC may forward 
any identified issue of concern to the heads of relevant 
agencies for resolution.
    Section 2(g)(2) instructs Federal or State agencies 
considering an aspect of an application for a Federal 
authorization to consider any data gathered by aerial or other 
remote means submitted by the applicant. The agency may grant a 
conditional approval for the Federal authorization based on 
data gathered by aerial or remote means, conditioned on the 
verification of such data by subsequent onsite inspection.
    Section 2(g)(3) specifies that FERC, and Federal and State 
agencies, may allow a person applying for a Federal 
authorization to fund a third-party contractor to assist in 
reviewing an application.
    Section 2(h) directs FERC, with input from any Federal or 
State agency considering an aspect of an application, to track 
and make available to the public on the Commission's website 
information related to the actions required to complete a 
Federal authorization.

         CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

    With respect to the requirement of clause 3(e) of rule XIII 
of the Rules of the House of Representatives, changes in 
existing law made by the bill, as reported, this section was 
not made available to the Committee in time for the filing of 
this report.

                             MINORITY VIEWS

    H.R. 1115 would substantially weaken the environmental 
review process required under the National Environmental Policy 
Act (NEPA) for pipeline authorizations required under sections 
3 and 7 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA). Furthermore, an amendment 
adopted on a recorded vote by the Full Committee at markup 
would further violate bedrock environmental statutes by 
effectively negating the framework and application of the 
Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly known as the 
Clean Water Act) as it applies to pipeline authorizations.
    The siting and authorization of natural gas pipelines is 
often controversial, and any legislation proposing significant 
alterations to that process, such as H.R. 1115, would benefit 
substantially from an opportunity for experts from agencies 
that currently hold jurisdiction over that process to weigh in. 
Unfortunately, the Committee did not receive any testimony from 
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) on this bill. 
When the Committee last considered nearly identical legislation 
in 2017, FERC's Director of the Office of Energy Projects, Mr. 
Terry Turpin, testified that he was ``. . . concerned that this 
[bill] will require the use of Commission resources that could 
be better spent analyzing the proposed projects and could lead 
to unproductive tension between the agencies in the review 
process''.\1\ Turpin also testified that FERC had significant 
responsibilities to track and report progress for large and 
complex pipelines projects under Title XLI of the Fixing 
America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST-41), and that the 
bill required significant duplication of those efforts.\2\ 
Given that Turpin testified just six months after the enactment 
of FAST-41, the Committee could have benefited from his updated 
opinion after six years of FAST-41 implementation of how and if 
provisions under section 2(g) of the Committee Print of H.R. 
1115 are duplicative of efforts currently carried out by the 
Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council (FPISC) or 
would unnecessarily drain FERC's resources. Unfortunately, the 
Committee was not given that opportunity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Testimony of Terry 
Turpin, Director, Office of Energy Projects, Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission, Hearing on Legislation Pipeline and Infrastructure 
Modernization, 115th Congress. (May 3, 2017).
    \2\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    More broadly, H.R. 1115 is a solution in search of a 
problem. Turpin testified six years ago that between 2009-2016, 
88 percent of pipeline projects applying for section 7 
authorization received certificates within one year.\3\ Then-
FERC Chairman Richard Glick indicated in an appearance before 
the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources in 2021 
that ``. . . the time the commission was taking to approve 
certificate applications was comparable to that in previous 
years''.\4\ FERC is approving natural gas pipelines under 
current statutes at its normal, efficient pace.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\Id.
    \4\Congressional Research Service, Interstate Natural Gas Pipeline 
Siting: FERC Policy and Issues for Congress (June 9, 2022) (R45239).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    While H.R. 1115 is unlikely to speed up the pipeline 
authorization process, it would gut the environmental review 
process for natural gas pipeline authorizations. Section 2(d) 
requires FERC to invite certain agencies to become 
``participating agencies'' for a specific authorization 
application, and all Federal, State, local, and Tribal agencies 
not invited to become such an agency are automatically labeled 
``non-designated agencies.'' These ``non-designated agencies'' 
are barred from participating in the environmental review 
process and FERC is barred from considering or even accepting 
into the record their comments. Effectively, H.R. 1115 gives 
FERC the power to render certain agencies more powerless than 
an outside intervenor in the environmental review process, even 
if an agency has legal obligations under other statutes to 
comment on the environmental review. This eviscerates the 
ability of Federal, State, local, and Tribal agencies to 
properly communicate the environmental impacts of proposed 
authorizations.
    Section (e)(1) of H.R. 1115 also requires Federal agencies 
to make decisions for authorizations required for a natural gas 
pipeline within 90 days of FERC issuing an environmental 
review. This can leave Federal agencies between a rock and a 
hard place--they can either violate their obligations under 
bedrock environmental statutes to thoroughly consider and 
evaluate the application of a proposed pipeline, or they can 
violate this new obligation to adhere to FERC's timeline. This 
would potentially have consequences unforeseen by the 
majority--agencies may simply determine that the easiest way 
forward without violating environmental statutes or the 
provisions within H.R. 1115 is to deny more authorizations for 
natural gas projects as they will not have the requisite time 
to thoroughly vet projects.
    Finally, section 2(f)(2) of H.R. 1115 requires Federal and 
State agencies to accept data gathered by remote means, and 
grant a conditional approval for Federal authorization based on 
that remote data. In Turpin's response to questions during the 
2017 hearing, he noted that remote data sometimes did not 
discover certain features that are eligible for protection 
under environmental statutes, requiring the applicant to 
conduct an expensive re-route of the project.\5\ Furthermore, 
witness Jennifer Danis, in the same hearing, in a response to a 
question by Rep. Paul Tonko (D-NY), responded that ``Aerial 
data . . . provides an extremely limited view of what is on the 
ground. It cannot be accurate with respect to wetlands 
delineation. It cannot be accurate with respect to endangered 
species, vernal ponds, seeps, vegetation, other things that 
require detailed onsite surveys. In the provision in the 
amendments for aerial survey data, requiring ancillary federal 
authorizations to consider those data simply decreases 
efficiency because it in essence asks, for example, states 
under 401 certification to consider an application based on 
guesswork the first time, and then to go back and to reconsider 
that same application once they can make a true determination 
of what the onsite environmental impacts would be.''\6\ This 
provision in the bill allows natural gas pipeline developers to 
sidestep engagement with impacted landowners until far later in 
the process, denying landowners an opportunity to engage with 
the process from the very beginning.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\See note 1.
    \6\House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Testimony of Jennifer 
Danis, Senior Staff Attorney, Eastern Environmental Law Center, On 
behalf of Columbia University, the New Jersey Conservation Foundation, 
and the Stony-Brook Millstone Watershed Association, Hearing on 
Legislation Pipeline and Infrastructure Modernization, 115th Cong. (May 
3, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    During the Subcommittee and Full Committee markups of H.R. 
1115, Democrats offered several amendments to the bill to 
address their concerns. At the Subcommittee markup, Rep. Paul 
Tonko offered an amendment that would have struck the portion 
of the bill limiting the authority of non-designated agencies. 
At the Full Committee markup, Ranking Member of the 
Subcommittee on Energy, Climate, and Grid Security Rep. Diana 
DeGette (D-CO) offered an amendment that would have required 
any company seeking to utilize section 7(h) of the NGA's 
eminent domain authority to obtain a finding from FERC that 
their usage of eminent domain is in the public interest. 
Ranking Member of the Full Committee, Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. 
(D-NJ) offered an amendment that would have struck the 
provision discussed above relating to remote surveys. Finally, 
Rep. Kathy Castor (D-FL) offered an amendment that would have 
prevented the bill from taking effect until FERC certified that 
the bill was necessary to efficiently and effectively authorize 
pipelines pursuant to section 7 of the NGA, that section 2(g) 
of the bill was not duplicative of other requirements (such as 
FAST-41), and that the bill would not result in unnecessary 
Federal spending. All four amendments failed on a recorded 
vote, though Ranking Member DeGette's amendment won bipartisan 
support.
    At the Full Committee markup of H.R. 1115, Energy, Climate, 
and Grid Security Chairman Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC) offered an 
amendment that drastically altered the application of the 
Federal Water Pollution Control Act to authorizations to 
natural gas pipelines. The amendment guts the current power and 
discretion granted to states under the current law, and instead 
asks FERC, an energy regulator, to become an environmental 
regulatory agency by picking which conditions filed by state 
environmental regulators it wants natural gas pipelines to 
abide by.
    For the reasons stated above, we dissent from the views 
contained in the Committee's report.
                                        Frank Pallone, Jr.,
                  Ranking Member, Committee on Energy and Commerce.

                                  [all]