Summary of the Bill

The proposed H.R. 8022 bill seeks to amend the Natural Gas Act by establishing firm deadlines for reviewing applications for natural gas export and import. Specifically, it mandates that the Secretary of Energy must make a decision on such applications within 180 days of receipt. If the Secretary fails to meet this deadline, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) may step in to make a decision, unless it finds the proposed application contrary to the public interest. Additionally, the bill provides an expedited review process for projects associated with free trade agreements and certain low-impact projects, aiming to streamline operations in these specific contexts.

Significant Issues

Several notable issues arise from this bill:

1. Lack of Clear Evaluation Criteria: While the bill sets a strict 180-day deadline for decision-making, it does not specify the criteria or factors the Secretary of Energy should consider when granting or denying applications. This gap could result in arbitrary or inconsistent decisions.

2. Potential for Institutional Conflict: The bill provides the FERC with authority to act on an application if the Secretary of Energy does not meet the deadline. This overlap in responsibilities could lead to power struggles or conflicts between these governmental bodies.

3. Narrow Definition of Low-Impact Projects: The definition of a "low-impact project" is limited to expansions of natural gas terminals by no more than 5 billion cubic feet per day. Consequently, potentially low-impact projects not fitting this specific definition may be overlooked, reducing the bill's inclusivity.

4. Ambiguity of 'Public Interest': The frequent use of the term "consistent with the public interest" without a clear definition could lead to varied interpretations, legal challenges, and delays in application processing.

5. Administrative Burden: The requirement for the Secretary to report to Congress each time a deadline is missed may create unnecessary administrative work without a clear explanation of its benefits or necessity.

6. Complex Language: The bill's technical and legal language might pose comprehension challenges for the general public, potentially affecting transparency and understanding.

Potential Impact on the Public and Stakeholders

Broad Public Impact: The bill aims to expedite and bring more predictability to the natural gas application process. For the general public, this might lead to improved energy availability and potentially lower gas costs due to more efficient regulatory procedures. However, the ambiguity and administrative burdens highlighted might slow down implementation, mitigating these benefits.

Impact on Stakeholders:

• Energy Companies: These stakeholders would likely view the rigid deadlines positively, as it reduces uncertainty in their project timelines. However, potential conflicts between the Department of Energy and FERC might delay proceedings or lead to unpredictable outcomes.

• Environmental Advocates: The bill's lack of clear criteria for decision-making and its focus on expedited processes may raise concerns about adequate environmental and public consideration in approving projects.

• Government Agencies: Both the Department of Energy and FERC could experience increased stress due to the tight deadlines and possible administrative burdens. Effective coordination and role clarity would be crucial to avoid inefficiencies or bureaucratic disputes.

In conclusion, while H.R. 8022 seeks to improve the efficiency of the natural gas application review process, several issues related to clarity, potential conflicts, and administrative burdens could influence its effective implementation and perception among various stakeholders.