Omnibus Energy Legislation in the 107th Congress: Side-by-side Comparisons (CRS Report for Congress)
Premium Purchase PDF for $24.95 (207 pages)
add to cart or
subscribe for unlimited access
Pro Premium subscribers have free access to our full library of CRS reports.
Subscribe today, or
request a demo to learn more.
| Release Date |
June 7, 2002 |
| Report Number |
RL31427 |
| Report Type |
Report |
| Authors |
Mark Holt and Carol Glover, Resources, Science and Industry Division |
| Source Agency |
Congressional Research Service |
Summary:
The House and Senate have passed two distinct versions of an omnibus energy bill
( H.R. 4 ), the first comprehensive energy legislation in ten years. The substantial
differences between the two chambers' approaches to energy policy remain to be resolved in
conference, which is expected to take place over the summer.
The House version of H.R. 4 , the Securing America's Future Energy Act of 2001,
which passed August 2, 2001, includes a key component of the Bush Administration's energy
strategy: opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to oil and gas exploration and
development. The Senate version, the Energy Policy Act of 2002, approved on April 25, 2002,
leaves ANWR off-limits to drilling.
The electricity provisions of the Senate-passed H.R. 4 would continue to change the
regulatory requirements for the wholesale electric market. The House-passed H.R. 4 does
not contain electricity provisions. In general, the Senate version would repeal the Public Utility
Holding Company Act (PUHCA) and give the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and
the state utility commissions access to utility books and records. It would also repeal the mandatory
purchase requirement of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA) when FERC finds that
a competitive electric market exists.
Automobile and light truck fuel efficiency was the subject of considerable debate in both
houses. In its version of H.R. 4, the House included language that calls for a reduction of
5 billion gallons in light-duty truck fuel consumption over the period of model years 2004-2010.
The Senate version would charge the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
with development of new Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards using the
administrative procedure that, since FY1996, the agency had been enjoined by Congress from
initiating. However, the Senate bill also would freeze "pickup trucks" at the current light truck
standard of 20.7 mpg, likely shifting the burden for achieving savings to the passenger automobile
portion of the fleet.
Both versions of H.R. 4 include a package of energy tax cuts, primarily tax incentives
(or subsidies) for qualifying energy producers and consumers. In terms of revenue loss, the House
bill cuts energy taxes by $35.4 billion over the ten-year period from FY2002 through FY2011. In
contrast, the Senate bill's ten-year projected revenue loss is about $15.2 billion. The House bill
provides a greater tax cut for fossil fuel supply -- about $17 billion more over ten years -- than the
Senate bill.
Several significant provisions are contained only in the Senate-passed bill, including programs
to address global climate change, loan and price guarantees for a proposed Alaska natural gas
pipeline, a cutoff of oil imports from Iraq, minimum renewable energy content in motor vehicle fuel,
and renewable energy requirements for electricity providers.
