The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“ENSURING SMALL SCALE LNG CERTAINTY AND ACCESS ACT” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Energy was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H7887-H7894 on Sept. 6, 2018.
The Department oversees energy policies and is involved in how the US handles nuclear programs. Downsizing the Federal Government, a project aimed at lowering taxes and boosting federal efficiency, said the Department's misguided energy regulations have caused large losses to consumers for decades.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
ENSURING SMALL SCALE LNG CERTAINTY AND ACCESS ACT
General Leave
Mr. OLSON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the bill, H.R. 4606.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1049 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 4606.
The Chair appoints the gentlewoman from Wyoming (Ms. Cheney) to preside over the Committee of the Whole.
{time} 1338
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 4606) to provide that applications under the Natural Gas Act for the importation or exportation of small volumes of natural gas shall be granted without modification or delay, with Ms. Cheney in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the first time.
The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Olson) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. OLSON. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Chair, I rise in support of H.R. 4606, the Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act, a bill written by the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. Johnson).
This important bill will speed up the review of applications to export small amounts of natural gas to the emerging small LNG markets in the Caribbean, Central America, and South America. This bill will strengthen our energy security, create jobs at home, and open new markets for Americans.
This bill is about creating a level playing field for the smallest projects. Right now, to export natural gas to a country that we have a free trade agreement with, it is approved without red tape. We want to do that for very small projects, too, no matter the buyer.
H.R. 4606 is truly focused on ``small-scale'' projects. We are talking about projects that amount to maybe one-tenth of 1 percent of the natural gas America consumes every single day. It is only 0.14 billion cubic feet per day. The big LNG products that you hear about are more like 2 billion cubic feet per day. That is 0.14 versus 2 billion cubic feet. These are tiny projects worth looking at. We want them to make their way to the emerging markets.
But don't let the small size fool you. Just as larger LNG exports help us push back against Vladimir Putin and help free Eastern Europe, small LNG will preserve American influence in Latin America. We can give our trading partners a cleaner, more dependable option than unreliable and unstable Venezuelan exports. That is why I call our LNG exports ``liquid American freedom.'' America will never turn off the spigot over politics.
Madam Chair, this is a bipartisan bill. It went through regular order in the Energy and Commerce Committee, where we held hearings and accepted a bipartisan amendment to perfect the bill.
The Department of Energy is also in support of this bill's intent. Passing this bill, they said, means ``saving several months of review time, at a minimum.''
We have also heard from LNG producers, terminal operators, and overseas developers. One said it will provide certainty and speed up
``America's rise as a world-class exporter of natural gas, creating U.S. jobs, growing our economy, strengthening global energy security, all while reducing emissions and pollution.''
I believe it is important to point out that H.R. 4606 makes absolutely no changes to environmental law. In fact, at our markup we accepted a bipartisan amendment that clarifies that any project would have to qualify for a broad exclusion under NEPA to be put on the fast track. This bill is not about waiving environmental laws.
{time} 1345
Most importantly, DOD is working on the same problem and is improving their rules as we speak. They say that many of the countries in the Caribbean and Latin America don't have enough demand to cover the costs of enormous import terminals for huge ships. The small-scale LNG export market is the only path that makes sense to bring affordable American energy to these projects and countries.
Congress needs to put DOE's policy into law. That is the only way we can create certainty. No one wants to make investments on a single administration's policy. Congress must create certainty, and this bill does just that.
I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill. It is good for our economy, our jobs, and our economic diplomacy.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
This bill is unnecessary because the Department of Energy is aggressively approving liquefied natural gas exports. DOE currently conducts a public interest review of all applications to export LNG to a country without a free trade agreement with the United States, and this process is working just fine.
To date, DOE has granted final approval for 29 applications to export LNG. Over the past few years, the U.S. has emerged as one of the largest exporters in the world.
There is no backlog of applications or delay at DOE to speak of, and the Trump administration has taken every opportunity to promote U.S. natural gas abroad.
In July, the Department of Energy finalized a rule to automatically approve applications to export less than 0.14 billion cubic feet per day of LNG. It declares in this rule that all small-scale exports are always in the public interest, removes longstanding consumer protections of the Natural Gas Act, prevents the public from having the opportunity to know about or provide input on export proposals, and violates the public hearing requirements of the Natural Gas Act.
Rather than stand up for American consumers and manufacturers who benefit from low natural gas prices, the Trump administration is boosting the profits of oil and gas special interests by allowing them to export LNG without any regard for domestic impacts.
This bill is intended to codify DOE's small-scale LNG rule, but proponents have not justified the need for swift congressional action on a rule that was just finalized.
There are drawbacks to codifying the rule with such a prescriptive volume requirement. For example, should the circumstances arise where exporting this amount of LNG is no longer in the public interest, Congress would then have to enact a new law to make any necessary changes.
In addition, Madam Chair, an unrestricted export policy could lead to even higher levels of LNG exports, which could have significant impacts on domestic natural gas prices and adversely affect American consumers and manufacturers.
Unfettered exports would also exacerbate climate change by encouraging more fossil fuel extraction and displacing carbon-free sources of power. High methane leak rates and increased demand for LNG exports would likely offset any climate benefits associated with natural gas use.
For Congress and the Trump administration to prioritize such a policy at a time when methane pollution from U.S. oil and gas operation is expected to warm the planet as much as coal is, in my opinion, completely reckless.
Madam Chair, beyond that, the use of floor time on such an unnecessary bill is just the latest example of our current reality. Republicans are running a government of, by, and for the corporate interests, not a government for the people.
This bill will not create a single new job.
Madam Chair, the House has just 16 legislative days remaining before the election and just 8 legislative days before the end of the fiscal year. The farm bill expires this month. So does authorization for FAA and the Land and Water Conservation Fund. We also need to fund the government to prevent another Trump shutdown.
We should be focusing our limited time on legislation that would fix our crumbling infrastructure, create jobs that pay a livable wage, and move America toward a smarter, greener energy future.
We need a practical balance and sustainable energy policy. What we do not need are bills like this that target problems that don't exist. We don't need to be throwing more bones to the fossil fuel industry.
I will be opposing this legislation, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. OLSON. Madam Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Johnson), the author of the bill.
Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio. Madam Chair, I have said it many times this week, and I will say it again. The legislation before us today, H.R. 4606, the Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act, will help the United States fully realize its economic potential regarding small-
scale liquefied natural gas exports and associated technologies.
This bill addresses current permitting concerns, but it is also forward looking. H.R. 4606 will help the United States to grow as a reliable, trusted trading partner. It can help reduce trade deficits, promote new job opportunities at home, and strengthen ties with our allies abroad.
Specifically, this bill provides that applications under the Natural Gas Act for the importation or exportation of small volumes of natural gas will be granted without delay, but only if they do not require an environmental assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act. This means that both FERC and DOE must continue to fully comply with NEPA regulations and that they must evaluate the potential direct and indirect impacts, consult with other agencies, and receive public input.
Importantly, this bill is the product of bipartisan compromise and work. During markups at the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Representative Gene Green and I worked together so that both sides of the aisle could support this commonsense legislation. I appreciate his hard work, along with the work of many of my other colleagues.
As a result, this bill has support from a diverse group of stakeholders, including the Center for Liquefied Natural Gas, the National Association of Manufacturers, the Laborers' International Union of North America, the American Petroleum Institute, and Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions.
Now, as the Representative for rural eastern and southeastern Ohio, I have long recognized the benefits of excess natural gas exports. Because of the shale gas boom, new opportunities are emerging for Ohio and the surrounding States virtually daily, as ethane cracker plants and ethane storage hubs begin to take shape.
Reports show that this trend will only continue, as one study predicts that the region has sufficient ethane feedstock to support up to five ethane cracker plants.
These opportunities are huge and have become viable thanks to new technologies that have led to an increase in natural gas production. But it is also due to an increase in production resulting from the growing demand for excess U.S. natural gas.
In fact, natural gas production is at an all-time high, and reserves are so large that they are predicted to meet domestic demand for almost a century. Ohio alone reached new highs in October 2017, as natural gas production reached 5.5 billion cubic feet per day.
H.R. 4606 can play a role in furthering America's economic progress by allowing our domestic producers and gas providers to export small quantities of natural gas to neighboring countries in a more efficient manner.
Don't misunderstand this. There is an interest for U.S. natural gas in the Caribbean, Central America, and South America, although not in the quantities that the current large-scale domestic exporting facilities were built to address via conventional liquefied natural gas tankers.
This bill will help our job creators meet that demand and take full advantage of our economic opportunities throughout our Western Hemisphere. And, with the certainty provided by H.R. 4606, companies currently in operation or those exploring new small-scale possibilities will be incentivized to move forward with new investments with the increased certainty provided by H.R. 4606.
This is especially important considering that the Dominican Republic is the only country in the Caribbean with a free trade agreement that can get our excess natural gas easily. And, as Puerto Rico continues to rebuild after the devastating hurricane in 2017, increased shipments and availability of American small-scale LNG can help the island meet its energy needs.
H.R. 4606 will also better allow our domestic providers the opportunity to deliver a stable source of U.S. energy to countries currently relying on Venezuelan fuel oil, which has been used to gain influence within countries throughout the region.
This effort to increase U.S. energy opportunities within this area of the world is not new, as the previous administration also sought increased engagement through the creation of the Caribbean Energy Security Initiative. Similarly, the Department of Energy recently issued a final rule very similar to H.R. 4606.
Now I would like to quickly address a few concerns that we have heard about this bill during debate. Some of my colleagues have said that the bill is unnecessary because it would replicate a Department of Energy regulation that was recently finalized, while at the same time arguing that this bill would lead to an unrestricted natural gas export policy with dire consequences.
I disagree with both of those statements, as it is important for Congress to exercise its authority and not leave policy solely up to the administration, and this bill by no means promotes an unrestricted policy. What is telling about these conflicting statements is that they simply cannot both be true at the same time, and it leads me to question the sincerity behind the statements.
Additionally, I have heard arguments that this bill could allow companies to skip the review process for larger projects by splitting them into smaller pieces.
Now, these LNG companies are building to economies of scale. These are expensive projects. The financial viability of stacking or combining many small-scale trains is simply not viable, and the operating costs would surely cause the cost of gas to be uncompetitive in the global market.
Madam Chair, the benefits of natural gas exports are clear. As numerous Department of Energy studies and various independent studies have concluded, they are a net positive to our U.S. economy. These studies have found that LNG exports support thousands of American jobs, many of them within manufacturing.
In fact, the Department of Energy once again highlighted the benefits of LNG exports with a study it released in June. This study, which is in addition to four other studies commissioned by the DOE since 2012, presented additional data that demonstrates how LNG exports are a net benefit to our economy.
With U.S. natural gas reserves as large as they are, and with new technological advancements allowing our producers to access an increasing amount of natural gas each and every day, it is imperative that the United States takes full advantage of this important and abundant energy resource.
H.R. 4606 is a step in that direction. It will strengthen U.S. geopolitical ties, increase job creation, and promote domestic economic growth as a result.
Madam Chair, I hope all of my colleagues will join me in supporting this important bipartisan legislation today.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gene Green).
Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Madam Chair, I want to thank our ranking member for yielding me the time.
I rise in support of H.R. 4606, the Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act. This bill has been worked on in good faith with Mr. Johnson--I thank him for his kind words--which would expedite U.S. small-volume LNG exports, so long as they do not require an environmental impact assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA.
Natural gas production has dramatically increased all across the country thanks to the energy revolution that we have seen in the last 10 years. We are now able to get gas out of shelves long thought impossible.
The U.S. has enough natural gas to meet our own energy needs for over a century. Soon, we also will be able to be a net exporter of these petroleum products.
Despite being the world leader in production of natural gas, many companies are unable to export the small quantities of LNG, or liquefied natural gas, to neighboring countries in the Caribbean.
{time} 1400
If the U.S. does not have a free trade agreement with another nation, natural gas exports must go through a lengthy national determination at the Department of Energy. Currently, the U.S. has only a free trade agreement with the Dominican Republic in the region.
DOE recently recognized that this placed an undue burden on small volume exports and issued a rule similar to this bill to address the issue. The dominant fuel source in the region for these countries is Venezuelan fuel oil, a source that is not geopolitically friendly or environmentally sound.
What we would like to have is more natural gas being used for electricity in the Caribbean and Puerto Rico instead of fuel oil, which is an environmental disaster.
U.S. LNG in the region would drastically reduce emission rates from burning fuel oil for power generation. The benefits of H.R. 4606 are not limited to other countries. As I said, Puerto Rico continues to rebuild with the devastation of Hurricane Maria.
The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Chair, I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Madam Chair, to rebuild from the devastation of Hurricane Maria, this LNG has the potential to reshape the Puerto Rican grid, making it safer and more reliable and more environmentally safe.
This bill also protects the environment. No application for export under the Natural Gas Act will be granted unless the applicant qualifies for a categorical exclusion under NEPA, ensuring that there won't be an adverse environmental impact.
Study after study has shown natural gas exports are a clear net positive to our domestic economy. Moreover, energy ties develop diplomatic ties with countries that they go to. This bill will strengthen U.S. ties with countries throughout the region.
I urge my colleagues to support this important bill.
Mr. OLSON. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter).
Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of my good friend, Mr. Johnson's bill, the Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act.
As many Members are aware, we are currently in the midst of a natural gas boom, with liquefied natural gas more of a resource than ever before. We have seen how this increase in production has benefited not only the United States, but some of our closest allies and trading partners. Now we have an opportunity to continue to build and foster those relationships while stimulating American industries.
For over 60 years, the United States has been a net importer of natural gas, relying on other countries to supply our LNG needs. I have seen it firsthand, as I have a facility in my district that was once an import facility for natural gas. That has changed as they are undergoing a massive overhaul to allow for the export of natural gas.
This bill will help to address backlogs and delays in the application process by allowing small shipments of LNG to be exported, so long as they don't go over the threshold set forth in this legislation. That would have major implications for our regional trading partners, especially those in the Caribbean and Latin America, which don't have access to consistent and reliable forms of energy production.
I applaud my colleagues on the Energy and Commerce Committee for their bipartisan work on this legislation, and I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi).
Mr. GARAMENDI. Madam Chair, who doesn't want to export natural gas? I suspect we all do. We like to do it in the proper manner, and this is the debate to be had over whether it should be done with or without this exemption from the normal process.
But there is another issue at hand. Clearly, natural gas is a strategic national asset. Both sides would agree to that. I don't think there is any debate whatsoever--a strategic national asset. And it is certainly going to be to the benefit of certain parts of this Nation that happen to have shale gas available. It is also going to be a benefit to the petroleum industry and those that are able to extract the natural gas--all good.
But why don't we use this strategic national asset to support another strategic national asset, our maritime industry?
It used to be when the north slope of Alaska opened up that all of that oil that was exported from Alaska had to be on American ships with American sailors. Over the years, that disappeared. But we have an opportunity right here with this piece of legislation to really enhance the benefit that comes from this strategic national asset.
I am all for the Caribbean. Good for them. Good for us. But what if that was shipped on American ships, built in American shipyards by American workers, and the steel was American steel?
What if we made it in America? What if we used this natural gas export, LNG, for the benefit of the broad American economy, not just for a few places that are fortunate enough to have the gas in the ground and those that extract it?
Why not require that a small percentage--1, 2, 5, 10 percent--of that gas be on American-built ships with American mariners?
Spread the benefit of this extraordinary natural resource, this strategic national asset to the broad width of America, the shipyards of America located on our coasts, the steel mills of America, the engine manufacturers. Americans throughout could benefit.
The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Chair, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from California.
Mr. GARAMENDI. Well, let me wrap this up very, very quickly in the next 60 seconds.
A strategic national asset, natural gas, coupled with another strategic natural national asset, our mariners, our shipyards, our steel industry, our manufacturers of pumps and motors, take a small percentage.
By the way, we have a bill to do this, bipartisan, bicameral, Senator Wicker, Senator Casey, good men and women in California, in the legislature here on this side, all of us supporting this. So why don't we amend this bill in the process?
In the meantime, I will vote it out of here, but let's remember, this asset could be for the benefit of all America, not just a narrow portion of it.
Mr. OLSON. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Barton), the former chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee and the current chairman and a senior member of the Texas delegation.
(Mr. BARTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. BARTON. Madam Chair, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4606.
I want to compliment Congressman Johnson for his leadership and, also, on the Democratic side, Congressman Cuellar. I don't know if he is in the room. I compliment him for being an original cosponsor. I am kicking myself that I am not an original sponsor. I don't know how that happened, but I am proud of them.
This is a straightforward bill, Madam Chair. It simply says, as long as you are below a certain threshold, 0.14 BCF a day, you still have to file an application with the Department of Energy to export natural gas, but it shall be in order to be approved. So you still have to apply, but it is specific in the law that the answer will be ``yes'' as long as it is below this threshold.
You might think: Well, that is not very much. Why even bother?
Well, we still want to make sure that we know where it is going, so that is a good reason to do it. And the good news is that there is a market for small-scale LNG, certainly our partners in the Caribbean and South America. And who knows, if this works, maybe we can increase the number later on if we make sure that we don't do any environmental damage.
This is a good piece of legislation. I am proud that it is bipartisan. I hope that, when we pass it, it will be taken up very quickly in the other body and the President will sign it. I am strongly supportive, and I urge a ``yea'' vote.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Cuellar).
Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Chair, I want to thank the ranking member, Mr. Pallone, for yielding and his leadership in the committee, for all the work that he and his staff have done. I also want to thank my fellow Texan, Mr. Olson, for bringing this legislation to the floor. I want to thank my colleague, Representative Johnson, for introducing this bipartisan bill, along with my friend Gene Green, also from Texas.
In particular, the dean, Mr. Barton, I want to thank Mr. Barton because, back in December 2015, Mr. Barton and I worked along with a team here to lift the ban on oil exports, and that has been the boom for not only Texas, but for the rest of the country.
Today's legislation, Madam Chair, deals with H.R. 4606, the Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act. This bipartisan legislation codifies the Department of Energy's recent efforts to encourage the exports of small volumes of natural gas as countries in the Caribbean, Central America, and South America look to the United States to meet their natural gas needs.
Let me give you an example, a different type of country, Mexico.
Mexico is getting a lot of natural gas from us and refined products. In fact, the U.S. has an $8 billion surplus when it comes to natural gas that we are sending off, so we can also help our friends in the Caribbean and Central America and South America if we do the same thing.
The bottom line is this means jobs.
I have the Eagle Ford area, and I know about the jobs. Whether they are at $60,000, $70,000, or more, those are good jobs, and if we are able to export, we will be able to create jobs also. This is why it is important that we continue working with our former Governor, Rick Perry, in the Energy Department, to approve any application to import or export small amounts of LNG if there is no environmental review required and that application waiting time will be reduced by several months. Those several months mean jobs.
Right now, the U.S. is currently the world's largest producer of natural gas, with trillions of cubic feet of recoverable natural gas. And again, if we work together, especially with Canada, the U.S., and Mexico, we will be the new Middle East of the world by sticking together and working together.
Again, this bipartisan piece of legislation will benefit our economy, strengthen our ties with allies abroad, reduce our allies' reliance on Russian natural gas.
Again, this is good for the country, and we need to support this bipartisan piece of legislation, so let's move this bill forward to that particular goal.
Again, I want to thank all of you all for working on this bipartisan piece of legislation.
Mr. OLSON. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar), the chair of the Western Caucus.
Mr. GOSAR. Madam Chair, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4606, the Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act, bipartisan legislation introduced by my good friend and colleague, Representative Bill Johnson.
I applaud the gentleman from Ohio for his strong leadership in bringing forward this important bill. This commonsense legislation will further increase American energy dominance by expediting the permitting process for the small-scale liquefied natural gas, or LNG, market. Such action will create thousands of jobs, increase regulatory certainty, and help reduce global emissions.
Thanks to American ingenuity and the efforts of private companies, the United States is now the world's leading producer of oil and natural gas. Despite this remarkable achievement, businesses still face a plethora of bureaucratic hurdles that are unable to export small quantities of LNG expeditiously. Removing unnecessary roadblocks that are shackling LNG job creators will foster economic growth and increase global influence.
As DOE Secretary Rick Perry likes to say, we are not just exporting energy, we are exporting freedom. I saw that firsthand in Lithuania last year.
Further, the U.S. has the highest regulatory standards for producing and exporting oil and gas in the world. Put quite simply, if we aren't making it in America, someone else will, and they will most likely do it in a way that is worse for the environment.
I urge adoption of this excellent legislation introduced by the gentleman from Ohio.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Chair, I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Rush), the ranking member of the Energy Subcommittee.
{time} 1415
Mr. RUSH. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 4606, the Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act.
Madam Chair, this bill is unnecessary, as the Department of Energy has already finalized a rule that would approve any application to import or export as much as 0.14 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day if no environmental reviews are required.
Additionally, Madam Chair, I offered an amendment to this bill that would have protected the property rights of landowners, but that amendment was refused by the Rules Committee.
Madam Chair, my amendment would simply have ensured that eminent domain would not be exploited for the construction of any pipeline used to import or export any of the gas through this expedited process.
Madam Chair, Members from both sides of the aisle have been bombarded with complaints from their constituents who have been forced to defend their own property rights due to aggressive tactics employed by companies seeking to appropriate their land in order to make a profit.
Congress should stand on the side of these constituents, as my amendment would have ensured, instead of making it easier for private companies to seize land from American citizens. This is especially true in cases where applications are expedited, with little or no opportunity for public input or public debate through the process, as the underlying bill mandates.
Madam Chair, although my constituents are strongly opposed to this bill, and although my amendment was not made in order, I would urge my colleagues to support both of the amendments offered by my colleagues on the Energy and Commerce Committee.
Ranking Member Pallone's amendment would require public hearings so that the American people will have the opportunity to have their voices heard in this process.
Additionally, Congresswoman DeGette's amendment would require LNG export applications to demonstrate that the natural gas was produced in a manner that minimizes dangerous methane emissions.
A June 2018 report by Science magazine found that 13 million metric tons of methane are emitted yearly by the oil and gas industry, despite the fact that there is already existing cost-effective technology available to reduce these emissions.
So, Madam Chair, I strongly urge all of my colleagues to support both the Pallone and the DeGette amendments. If those two amendments are defeated, then I would urge all of my colleagues to oppose the underlying bill, H.R. 4606.
Mr. OLSON. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Mrs. Lesko).
Mrs. LESKO. Madam Chair, while in the district, I met with the Puerto Rican Center of Arizona, including Gretchen Patterson, the founder and president, Leticia Jimenez, Jose Moro, Claudio Medina, and Maria Romero. They are advocates for Puerto Rico and have family members still on the island. They work in Arizona communities to share the culture of Puerto Rico and educate people about the island. They described devastation on the island caused by Hurricane Maria. They also talked about the problems with the electrical grid, even before Hurricane Maria.
This legislation, H.R. 4606, will help Puerto Rico and other Caribbean islands by expediting the approval of projects to export small shipments of LNG to Caribbean island nations, which are in desperate need of natural gas to modernize their electric grids and supply more affordable fuel and feedstocks for manufacturing.
H.R. 4606 will also help our U.S. citizens living in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands who are still recovering from Hurricane Maria. While the territories don't need a special permit to receive U.S. natural gas shipments, they would certainly benefit if we allow more U.S. small-
scale LNG exports to other destinations in the Caribbean.
H.R. 4606 will jump-start investments and jobs, which will create economies of scale. With more competition, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands will have more supply options and lower costs.
The Caribbean islands have some of the highest fuel and electricity prices. We shouldn't deny them the opportunity to share in some of our surplus natural gas.
H.R. 4606 isn't a silver bullet, but it will help deliver cleaner and more affordable fuel to those remote locations.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Chair, I understand the previous speaker, my colleague from Arizona's interests in helping our friends and neighbors in the Caribbean, but nothing in this bill or the rule requires small-scale shipments to go to the Caribbean area. And, in fact, Puerto Rico is the largest importer of LNG in the region, and the problems associated with getting them natural gas are due to Jones Act restrictions, not DOE approval of export applications.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. OLSON. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Marshall).
Mr. MARSHALL. Madam Chair, I rise today to support my colleague, Bill Johnson's legislation, H.R. 4606, the Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act. With its passage, there will no longer be unnecessary restrictions placed on small-scale liquefied natural gas exports, creating more open, transparent, and competitive markets for our natural gas industry.
H.R. 4606 includes a rule finalized by the Department of Energy that expedites approval for small-scale gas exports, ending the several-
months wait in the review process.
These simple fixes are so commonsense that the bill itself is significantly bipartisan which, as you know, is a rarity here in Washington. But I am pleased to see that when the good clearly outweighs the bad, both sides really can come together, and that is what we see here today.
This legislation would also place small-scale exports on a level playing field with Canada and Mexico, and open new markets in the Caribbean, Central America, and South America. As a result, this bill would create new jobs in the United States, boosting our local economies.
I spent most of the day yesterday with the Farm Bill Conference Committee, where the biggest theme we heard was the need to have certainty. That desire for policy certainty is something that transcends parties and, in this case, committees. This legislation would provide that assurance to our energy folks and protect jobs and investments in the United States.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Chair, I have no additional speakers, and I yield myself the balance of my time.
Madam Chair, LNG exports are clearly a priority for this administration, and I see no indication that this trajectory is changing, so we don't need this bill to enshrine the prescriptive and problematic small-scale LNG rule into law.
Passing this bill will not create new jobs or approve any small-scale LNG applications. It is solely a political win for the fossil fuel industry at the expense of American consumers and manufacturers.
Those who are against unrestricted export of natural gas argue that cheap, domestic natural gas prices are providing a big boost and competitive advantage to U.S. manufacturing. They are worried that exporting large volumes of LNG will drive up domestic natural gas prices, harming American manufacturers and consumers.
Madam Chair, I believe it is reasonable to question the wisdom of exporting too much of our natural gas and to consider whether such an approach will hurt our domestic manufacturing base, and giving the fossil fuel industry a green light to extract and export unlimited amounts of natural gas will only lead to greater methane leaks and the displacement of carbon-free energy sources. So I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. OLSON. Madam Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.
It is real simple. This bill is about good-paying, American jobs, American energy going to our neighbors in Latin America, South America, Central America, and the Caribbean.
This bill does not skate around any environmental laws. You have to comply with all the rules as they exist today to export this natural gas.
This bill is bipartisan as here today, two speakers from the other side spoke in favor of this bill. I ask my colleagues to join those Members and our Members and vote for this good bill for American jobs, American security, and great foreign relations.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment under the 5-minute rule.
It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the 5-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Energy and Commerce, printed in the bill. The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read.
The text of the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute is as follows:
H.R. 4606
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act''.
SEC. 2. SMALL SCALE EXPORTATION OR IMPORTATION OF NATURAL
GAS.
Section 3(c) of the Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717b(c)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``For purposes'' and inserting ``(1) For purposes''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) For purposes of subsection (a), and in addition to any importation or exportation of natural gas described in paragraph (1), importation or exportation of natural gas shall be deemed to be consistent with the public interest, and an application for such importation or exportation shall be granted without modification or delay, if--
``(A) the application for such importation or exportation proposes to import or export a volume of natural gas that does not exceed 0.14 billion cubic feet per day; and
``(B) the Commission's approval of such application does not require an environmental impact statement or an environmental assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.''.
The CHAIR. No amendment to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in part B of House Report 115-919. Each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question.
Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Pallone
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 printed in part B of House Report 115-919.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 3, line 18, insert ``after opportunity for hearing and public input,'' after ``delay,''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1049, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Chair, one of my biggest concerns with this bill, and DOE's Small-Scale LNG rule, is the removal of public hearing requirements for LNG export applications. This is drastic change in the approval process, and my amendment seeks to restore the ability for public input through a public hearing.
Section 3 of the Natural Gas Act requires DOE to grant an application to export natural gas to a non-Free Trade Agreement country, unless it finds that the proposed export is not consistent with the public interest. And typically, notices of non-FTA applications are posted in the Federal Register for public comment, which ultimately informs DOE's evaluation of an application's consistence with the public interest.
DOE evaluates a range of factors when performing a public interest review, including economic impacts, international considerations, U.S. energy security, and environmental considerations. And these are important considerations that are unique to each export application, and the public plays a key role in DOE's decisionmaking process.
{time} 1430
But DOE recently turned this process on its head for small-scale exports.
Hidden in its small-scale LNG proposed rule, DOE proclaimed that:
``This proposed rule, and the 45-day comment period for this proposed rule, would constitute the notice and opportunity for hearing on all prospective small-scale natural gas export applications.''
What that means, Madam Chair, is that all qualifying small-scale export applications would be approved without any public notice or comment, or need for a unique public interest determination, in perpetuity.
I think that is pretty outrageous, and I would argue it violates the public hearing requirements of the Natural Gas Act.
DOE failed to justify the sweeping change to the existing approval process. Congress should avoid the same mistake.
Congress should not be in the business of limiting the participation of the American public in such a debate, but that is exactly what H.R. 4606 does.
By codifying the DOE rule, this legislation reduces the ability of communities directly impacted by these projects to give meaningful input during the review process.
Exporting America's resources to foreign nations while creating domestic environmental and public health impacts is not in the public interest, nor is cutting the public out of the process by which we express our interest.
Congress should not create laws to export our natural resources wealth at the expense of our environment and our manufacturers while simultaneously limiting the rights of Americans to comment on natural gas export projects in their communities.
My amendment is a commonsense proposal to fix this problem in the underlying bill. It is good government. It is in the public interest that consumers and communities have the ability to provide input on export applications, no matter how small.
Madam Chair, for these reasons, I urge adoption of my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio. Madam Chair, this amendment adds an additional round of DOE hearing and public comment on proposed small-scale LNG exports. Unfortunately, this amendment is designed to undercut the important benefits of this legislation, and we simply cannot accept it.
H.R. 4606 was narrowly drafted with bipartisan input throughout the committee process, as the ranking member knows very well. In fact, at committee, I worked with Mr. Green and other Democrats on a bipartisan amendment that ensures that DOE and FERC must fully comply with NEPA and the Council on Environmental Quality's regulations under this bill. This means they must evaluate the potential direct and indirect impacts, consult with other agencies, and, most importantly, receive public input.
Not only has this idea been vetted through hearings and markup on the Energy and Commerce Committee, but, additionally, this concept has already been thoroughly vetted and subjected to a fully transparent rulemaking process at the Department of Energy, complete with public comment and input.
We simply want to put this in the right lane. It should be the Congress that is passing law, not putting it solely in the hands of the administration.
Today's amendment serves only one purpose, and that is delay.
The purpose of H.R. 4606 is to help the United States fully realize its economic potential regarding small-scale liquefied natural gas exports and associated technologies. It will strengthen U.S. geopolitical ties, increase job creation, and promote domestic economic growth as a result.
This amendment jeopardizes those goals and it denies nations in the Caribbean and Latin America the opportunity to have an inexpensive, reliable source of energy from right here in the United States.
Madam Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Chair, I just wanted to read some parts of a letter from the Industrial Energy Consumers of America in support of the amendment.
Let me just say to my colleagues on the other side, the purpose of the amendment is not delay, but public input for the public interest.
The Industrial Energy Consumers write: ``In behalf of the Industrial Energy Consumers of America, IECA, we support your amendment to provide consumers of natural gas an `opportunity for hearing and public input' for small-scale LNG export applications, in advance of final approval by the U.S. Department of Energy. It is good government and in the public interest that consumers have the ability to provide input.
``Every study conducted by the U.S. Department of Energy on the potential economic impacts of LNG exports concludes that exports of LNG increase the price of natural gas and electricity. Although we do not anticipate this being a significant problem in the short term, public policy must consider longer term potential impacts. It is for this reason that it is wise to provide for public input. Consumers of natural gas deserve that option.
``The manufacturing sector consumes about 25 percent of all U.S. natural gas and demand is increasing annually. IECA members are mostly energy intensive trade exposed, EITE, companies, which means that relatively small changes to the price of natural gas and electricity can have relatively large impacts to competitiveness and jobs. For the majority of our applications, there is no substitute for natural gas.''
And then it is signed by the president, Paul Cicio.
Again, Madam Chair, I would urge support of my amendment. There is nothing wrong with public input. It is part of the democratic process.
I do think we need to be concerned about the increased price of natural gas from LNG exports and what it might mean not only for consumers, but for manufacturing. If manufacturing is decreased because of the increase, then that means fewer jobs for Americans.
So I appreciate the support from the Industrial Energy Consumers.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio. Madam Chair, I include letters of support in the Record.
CLNG, Center for Liquefied
Natural Gas,
December 11, 2017.Hon. Greg Walden,Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of
Representatives, Washington, DC.Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr.,Ranking Member, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of
Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Walden and Ranking Member Pallone: Regulatory certainty is vital to U.S. LNG and bipartisan legislation like the Unlocking Our Domestic LNG Potential Act (H.R. 4605) and The Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act
(H.R. 4606) take steps to provide a clear and straightforward path for the industry. Providing a certain pathway for U.S. natural gas to be sold abroad will create thousands of good paying jobs right here in the United States, generate millions in tax revenue for the federal, state, and local governments, and supply our allies and trading partners with a reliable, clean, safe source of energy.
The United States is awash with natural gas, with more discoveries almost daily, and in order for the U.S. natural gas industry to continue to be an engine for growth, reliable exports offer a perfect solution. Legislation by Congress that creates a more certain regulatory process enables our country to capture this narrow window of opportunity to export LNG internationally and sends a strong signal to our allies and trading partners that the U.S. is committed to its role as a global energy leader.
Bi-partisan support for LNG certainty highlights how important the issue is. Policymakers from both sides of the aisle can appreciate good paying jobs here at home and energy choices for allies around the globe. Representatives Johnson and Ryan have a long history of support for U.S. LNG and we look forward to working with them and others in the future on LNG issues.
We urge support for Representative Johnson and Ryan's Unlocking Our Domestic LNG Potential Act and The Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act.
Sincerely,
Charlie Riedl,Executive Director, Center for LNG.
____
Liuna!,
September 5, 2018.Hon. Paul Ryan,Speaker of the House of Representatives,Washington, DC.Hon. Nancy Pelosi,Minority Leader, House of Representatives,Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Speaker and Leader Pelosi: On behalf of the 500,000 members of the Laborers' International Union of North America (LIUNA), I want to express our support for H.R. 4606, Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act, offered by Representative Bill Johnson of Ohio. This bipartisan bill amends the Natural Gas Act by granting approval to applications, without modification or delay, seeking to export 0.14 billion cubic feet (Bcf) per day or less, that do not require an Environmental Assessment (EA) or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
H.R. 4606 solidifies and provides certainty to a recently enacted rule made by the Department of Energy (DOE) that mirrors Rep. Johnson's legislation. This cuts the red tape for small-scale exports and imports of liquefied natural gas. This bill not only continues to promote our Nation's economic growth, it also guarantees job security for the thousands of skilled working men and women we proudly represent within the energy sector.
LIUNA believes in an all-of-the-above energy policy. Our members work across virtually every sector of our domestic energy production. Whether it is solar-panel fields, wind farms, pipelines, or hydro power, our members are working to bringing our Nation's abundant energy resources to market.
This legislation has bipartisan cosponsors, and was voted out of committee with even stronger bipartisan support. I urge you to support H.R. 4606, Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act.
With kind regards, I am
Sincerely yours,
Terry O'Sullivan,General President.
____
Citizens for Responsible
Energy Solutions,
Washington, DC, September 5, 2018.Speaker Paul Ryan,House of Representatives,Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker Ryan: On behalf of Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions (CRES), I am writing in support of H.R. 4606, Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act. CRES urges the House to pass this legislation.
H.R. 4606 would expedite approvals for small-scale exports and imports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) up to 0.14 billion cubic feet per day if no environmental reviews are required. The legislation would help modernize U.S. energy policy by facilitating exports and imports of LNG which is critical as the U.S continues to position itself as a net energy exporter over the next decade. The legislation would support the growth of jobs in the LNG space because of greater certainty in permitting and because it would allow for the greater use of LNG terminals already built or under construction. This economic growth would be achieved without substantively greater risk to the environment due to a strict adherence to National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements.
H.R. 4606 is important legislation for growing domestic jobs and for elevating the U.S.'s position in global energy markets. We encourage Congress to pass this legislation as soon as possible.
Sincerely,
Heather Reams,
Managing Director.
Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio. Madam Chair, I have before me a letter from the Center for Liquefied Natural Gas. It says: ``The United States is awash with natural gas, with more discoveries almost daily, and in order for the U.S. natural gas industry to continue to be an engine for growth, reliable exports offer a perfect solution.''
They go on to say: ``Bipartisan support for LNG certainty highlights how important this issue is.''
I also have a letter here in front of me from LIUNA, and they say this: ``On behalf of the 500,000 members of the Laborers' International Union of North America, LIUNA, I want to express our support for H.R. 4606, Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act.''
They go on to say: ``LIUNA believes in an all-of-the-above energy policy.''
Madam Chair, that is exactly what H.R. 4606 promotes.
I also have a letter here in front of me from Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions. There is nobody any more concerned about our energy policy than the American people. We talk about it here all the time in Washington, D.C., oftentimes in political terms, ideological terms, but it is the American people who are going to benefit from the results of LNG exports, whether it is along the Ohio River or all across America.
This is a job creator. It is an opportunity creator. It strengthens our geopolitical ties. And we can't underestimate the strength of that geopolitical tie factor in what we are doing.
We have countries like Russia that are using their energy resources to hammer other countries, to use it as a leverage point to force them into obedience. The last thing that we want is for countries in the Caribbean and Latin America to have to face going to Russia or other countries to get their energy resources when they could be getting those from us.
Right here, this letter from Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions says: ``On behalf of Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions, CRES, I am writing in support of H.R. 4606, Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act. CRES urges the House to pass this legislation.''
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).
The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey will be postponed.
Amendment No. 2 Offered by Ms. DeGette
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 printed in part B of House Report 115-919.
Ms. DeGETTE. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 3, line 22, strike ``; and'' and insert a semicolon.
Page 4, line 2, strike ``of 1969'' and all that follows through the end and insert ``of 1969; and''.
Page 4, after line 2, insert the following:
``(C) with respect to an application for such exportation, the application includes sufficient information to demonstrate that the natural gas to be exported was produced using available designs, systems, and practices to minimize methane emissions from leaks or venting.''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 1049, the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Colorado.
Ms. DeGETTE. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Chair, H.R. 4606, the Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act, is far from perfect, as several of our colleagues have noted. The amendment I am offering today would reverse most of the bill's most egregious shortcomings and help ensure that liquefied natural gas exports benefiting from expedited approval truly are in the public interest, as the original bill purports to do.
This amendment would help keep methane waste to a minimum for the LNG exports permitted by the bill. It requires export applications to show that the natural gas was produced using available techniques and technologies to minimize methane emissions from leaks or venting.
In other words, this amendment would require companies developing liquefied natural gas for export to actually develop and export the natural gas rather than venting vast quantities into the atmosphere or lighting it on fire.
This requirement is easy to implement with readily available technologies. Many companies are already working to reduce their methane emissions.
Sara Ortwein, president of XTO Energy, a subsidiary of ExxonMobil, just this week stated her company's continued support for Federal methane regulations, and she is far from alone.
In Colorado, we have had strong methane rules in place since 2014, and our oil and gas industry has continued to thrive, even as it is required to find and stop the leaks.
Stopping these leaks has real benefits. There is widespread scientific consensus that methane leaks into the atmosphere significantly contribute to climate change. The volatile organic compounds released with the methane increase ground-level pollution and harm public health. When natural gas is produced on public land, it leaks rob taxpayers of royalties on the wasted gas.
So we can and we must prevent such needless harmful emissions wherever possible, and this measure is one way to do it. It would increase the royalties collected for taxpayers; it would reduce climate-changing emissions; and it would protect public health.
Vote for it and you will vote for a better future for our constituents, for our children, and for generations to come.
Now, colleagues who are considering whether to support this amendment may be interested to learn that natural and regional polling consistently show strong bipartisan support for methane rules. Sixty to 80 percent or more of those polled expressed their approval.
Now, there may be many reasons for which some people will oppose this amendment, but I can't think of any that would stand up to scrutiny. I would look forward to discussing those reasons here. And if you oppose this amendment, let's talk about it.
Otherwise, we can reduce these emissions; we can pass this bill; and it would go a long way toward cleaning up our environment and saving money.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. OLSON. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. OLSON. Madam Chair, this amendment is unnecessary and misguided because emissions from natural gas wells are already regulated by the EPA and States under the Clean Air Act.
H.R. 4606 applies only to projects that have already undergone rigorous environmental review and are eligible for an exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act.
{time} 1445
Other than the Natural Gas Act, DOE has the responsibility to protect the public interest. In doing so, DOE must consider whether the project applicant is following the laws and regulations, including those under the Clean Air Act.
Let's be clear about the environmental benefits of natural gas in general and this legislation, specifically.
U.S. carbon emissions in 2017 were the lowest they have been since 1992 because we are using more clean natural gas. Unfortunately, carbon emissions are increasing in other parts of the world because they don't have access to clean-burning natural gas. Our friends in South America, Central America, and the Caribbean are still burning Venezuelan fuel oil in places where our U.S. LNG can replace that fuel oil.
H.R. 4606 is good for our economy. It is good for new American jobs, and it is good for our environment. This legislation will start America's rise as a world-class exporter of natural gas, which will help reduce emissions and pollution all across the globe.
If you really care about reducing emissions, you can't deny the benefits of this legislation.
I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Chairman, just quickly, these rules that the gentleman referred to, alleging that they solve the problem, I would just say the BLM Methane and Waste Prevention rule was eliminated by the Trump EPA under Scott Pruitt, and so that is not controlling the public lands emissions right now, which is what this amendment would do. And the EPA rule under the Clean Air Act is also under attack.
Really, if it is current law, why not just support it? Why not say, if we are going to be developing this LNG, let's stop these leaks? Because it helps our environment, it helps with our air and our climate change, and it also helps with profits. And, frankly, for the BLM lands and the other Federal lands, it will help the taxpayers recover money.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. OLSON. Mr. Chairman, again, this bill is all about good-paying American jobs.
American exports of liquified natural gas help our neighbors in South America, Central America, and the Caribbean. This bill makes our air cleaner. Let's lock those benefits in for years to come.
I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 4606 and oppose this amendment.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Calvert). The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.
Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado will be postponed.
Mr. OLSON. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Ms. Cheney) having assumed the chair, Mr. Calvert, Acting Chair of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 4606) to provide that applications under the Natural Gas Act for the importation or exportation of small volumes of natural gas shall be granted without modification or delay, had come to no resolution thereon.
____________________
