[House Report 113-61]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
113th Congress Rept. 113-61
} HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES {
1st Session } { 113-61 Part 3
======================================================================
NORTHERN ROUTE APPROVAL ACT
_______
May 17, 2013.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Shuster, from the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 3]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, to whom
was referred the bill (H.R. 3) to approve the construction,
operation, and maintenance of the Keystone XL pipeline, and for
other purposes, having considered the same, report favorably
thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
Purpose of Legislation........................................... 1
Background and Need for Legislation.............................. 2
Hearings......................................................... 3
Legislative History and Consideration............................ 3
Committee Votes.................................................. 4
Committee Oversight Findings..................................... 11
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures........................ 11
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................ 11
Performance Goals and Objectives................................. 12
Advisory of Earmarks............................................. 12
Duplication of Federal Programs.................................. 12
Disclosure of Directed Rule Makings.............................. 12
Federal Mandate Statement........................................ 12
Preemption Clarification......................................... 13
Advisory Committee Statement..................................... 13
Applicability of Legislative Branch.............................. 13
Section-by-Section Analysis of Legislation....................... 13
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............ 14
PURPOSE OF LEGISLATION
H.R. 3 approves the construction, operation, and
maintenance of the Keystone XL pipeline. The bill declares that
a Presidential permit shall not be required for the pipeline
described in the application filed on May 4, 2012, by
TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, L.P. (TransCanada) to the
Department of State for the Keystone XL pipeline, including the
Nebraska reroute evaluated in the Final Evaluation Report
issued by the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality in
January 2013 and approved by the Nebraska governor. It also
deems the final environmental impact statement issued by the
Secretary of State on August 26, 2011, coupled with such Final
Evaluation Report, to satisfy all requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and of the National Historic
Preservation Act. Furthermore, the legislation ensures that
other permits necessary for construction to begin are approved
in a timely fashion or deemed approved given the project's
significant level of scrutiny and study.
BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION
In September 2008, TransCanada Corp. applied to the U.S.
Department of State for a Presidential Permit to cross the
U.S.-Canada international border with the Keystone XL pipeline
and carry oil sands from Alberta, Canada, to U.S. Gulf Coast
refineries. After nearly three years of review, the State
Department issued a Final Environmental Impact Statement for
the project on August 26, 2011, finding no significant impacts
to most resources along the corridor. On November 10, 2011, the
State Department announced a decision to seek additional
information about alternative pipeline routes and delayed
issuance of the permit. On December 23, 2011, however, Congress
took action by passing the Temporary Payroll Tax Cut
Continuation Act of 2011, which required the President to grant
the Keystone XL pipeline permit within 60 days of the law's
enactment, unless the President determined that the pipeline
was not in the national interest. On January 18, 2012, the
State Department recommended that ``the presidential permit for
the proposed Keystone XL pipeline be denied,'' and that same
day, the President did so.
Following the denial, on February 27, 2012, TransCanada
informed the Department of State it would proceed with its Gulf
Coast project from Cushing, Oklahoma to the Gulf Coast
refineries. As that project had independent utility, it did not
need a Presidential permit since it did not cross an
international border. TransCanada then, on May 4, 2012, filed a
new application with the State Department for the Northern
Route from the border crossing in Montana to Steele City,
Nebraska. TransCanada also submitted, on September 5, 2012, a
new routing alternative to the Nebraska Department of
Environmental Quality. On January 22, 2013, the Nebraska
governor approved that new routing. After more review and
study, the State Department issued a Draft Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement on March 1, 2013, for the
Northern Route.
The State Department, 10 cooperating agencies, and the
three requisite State environmental agencies have reviewed and
studied the Keystone XL pipeline for nearly five years. The
length and amount of review makes the project the most
extensively studied pipeline project in the history of this
country. In these studies the State Department found that the
Keystone XL project will have no significant impact on the
environment. Furthermore, in denying the Keystone XL project in
January 2012, the President specifically cited concerns with
the project's routing through the Nebraska Sand Hills region.
H.R. 3 incorporates the revised routing of the pipeline through
Nebraska that avoids the Sand Hills Region and was approved by
the Nebraska governor in January 2013.
Pipelines are both the safest and most efficient method of
transporting oil. In addition, the Keystone XL Pipeline will
have the highest safety standards of any pipeline ever
constructed. The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration has recommended, and TransCanada has agreed to
implement, 57 project-specific special conditions for
construction of the project. H.R. 3 will ensure the Keystone XL
Pipeline is approved in a timely manner with the highest level
of safety to reduce the risks to the environment and the
public.
Furthermore, the Keystone XL pipeline will generate
significant economic impacts for the Nation. The State
Department estimates the Keystone XL pipeline will produce
42,100 jobs. In addition, the State Department found this
project will have a significant positive economic impact,
including an estimated $3.3 billion in direct expenditures and
$2.05 billion in earnings. These earnings, jobs, and economic
impacts will happen because H.R. 3 moves the Keystone XL
project forward.
The Keystone XL pipeline will also reduce our Nation's
dependence upon overseas foreign oil and increase the diversity
of the Nation's oil supplies. The State Department has found
that the pipeline will transport 830,000 barrels per day of oil
from Canada to the Gulf Coast, totaling nearly half of the
country's current daily imports from the Middle East. Canada is
already the Nation's largest and most reliable trading partner.
Moreover, Canada is not a member of OPEC, and sourcing our
energy needs with Canada, rather than Venezuela or the Middle
East, is in our national interest. As the State Department has
noted, ``non-OPEC Canadian crude oil supplies advance the
energy security of the United States, given Canada's close
proximity, our free trade agreements, and our close bilateral
relationship with this stable democracy.'' H.R. 3 will,
therefore, aid in getting more oil into the market from a
stable and reliable neighbor.
H.R. 3 recognizes all of the aforementioned benefits of the
Keystone XL pipeline. The project's environmental impacts have
been studied and found to have no significant impact on the
environment; it will be the safest pipeline in the Nation's
history; it will have significant economic impacts on the
country; and it will enhance the Nation's energy independence.
HEARINGS
No hearings were held on H.R. 3.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY AND CONSIDERATION
On March 15, 2013, Representative Lee Terry introduced H.R.
3, the Northern Route Approval Act, to expedite the approval of
the Keystone XL pipeline. On May 16, 2013, the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure met in open session and
ordered the bill reported favorably to the House by record vote
with a quorum present. The vote was 33 yeas, 24 nays and 1
member voting present.
An amendment was offered in Committee by Ranking Member
Rahall, which was defeated by record vote. The vote was 25 yeas
to 32 nays. The amendment would have struck section 3 from the
bill.
An amendment was offered in Committee by Representative
Bishop of New York, which was defeated by record vote. The vote
was 27 yeas to 31 nays. The amendment would have required
TransCanada to certify diluted bitumen is oil for the purposes
of considering contributions to the Oil Spill Liability Trust
Fund.
An amendment was offered in Committee by Representative
Esty, which was defeated by record vote. The vote was 27 yeas
to 31 nays. The amendment would have struck ``operation, and
maintenance'' from section 7 of the bill.
An amendment was offered in Committee by Representative
Cohen, which was defeated by record vote. The vote was 27 yeas
to 31 nays. The amendment would have struck section 4 of the
bill.
Another amendment was offered in Committee by
Representative Cohen, which was withdrawn. The amendment would
have required oil spill response plans for the project to be
shared with the Governors in every state through which the
pipeline is operated.
COMMITTEE VOTES
Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires each committee report to include the
total number of votes cast for and against on each record vote
on a motion to report and on any amendment offered to the
measure or matter, and the names of those members voting for
and against. There were a total of five record votes taken in
connection with consideration of H.R. 3.
Record votes were taken on amendments offered in Committee
by Representative Rahall, Representative Bishop of New York,
Representative Esty, and Representative Cohen. The Committee
disposed of these four amendments by record vote as follows:
The final recorded vote was to order H.R. 3 favorably
reported to the House. The votes were as follows:
COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(1) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee's oversight findings and recommendations are
reflected in this report.
NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY AND TAX EXPENDITURES
Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives does not apply where a cost estimate and
comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974 has been timely submitted prior to the filing of the
report and is included in the report. Such a cost estimate is
included in this report.
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE
With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(3) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section
402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has
received the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 3 from the
Director of the Congressional Budget Office:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, May 17, 2013.
Honorable Bill Shuster, Chairman,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 3, the Northern
Route Approval Act.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Megan
Carroll.
Sincerely,
Douglas W. Elmendorf,
Director.
Enclosure.
H.R. 3--Northern Route Approval Act
H.R. 3 would specify various procedures pertaining to
federal review and permitting of the proposed Keystone XL
pipeline, which would be constructed by a private company to
carry crude oil from Alberta, Canada, to destinations on the
U.S. Gulf Coast. In particular, the bill would exempt the
proposed project, which would cross international borders, from
the existing requirement to obtain a Presidential permit. In
addition, H.R. 3 would deem various actions by federal agencies
involved with permitting decisions related to the proposed
pipeline to be satisfied and certain federal permits to be
granted.
CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 3 would have no
significant impact on the federal budget. Based on information
from affected agencies, CBO estimates that the proposed changes
to administrative procedures would not significantly affect
federal spending for such activities relative to current law.
The bill would not affect direct spending or revenues;
therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.
H.R. 3 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
On May 1, 2013, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 3
as ordered reported by the House Committee on Energy and
Commerce on April 17, 2013. On May 2, 2013, CBO transmitted a
cost estimate for H.R. 3 as ordered reported by the House
Committee on Natural Resources. All three versions of the
legislation are identical, and the CBO cost estimates are the
same.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Megan Carroll.
The estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(4) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
performance goal and objective of this legislation is to
expedite the approval of the Keystone XL pipeline by deeming
the already completed environmental reviews sufficient under
Federal law, deeming the necessary permits approved, and
placing time limits on permitting processes and judicial
reviews.
ADVISORY OF EARMARKS
Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House
of Representatives, the Committee is required to include a list
of congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited
tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of
rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives. No
provision in the bill includes an earmark, limited tax benefit,
or limited tariff benefit under clause 9(e), 9(f), or 9(g) of
rule XXI.
DUPLICATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS
Pursuant to section 3(j) of H. Res. 5, 113th Cong. (2013),
the Committee finds that no provision of H.R. 3 establishes or
reauthorizes a program of the federal government known to be
duplicative of another federal program, a program that was
included in any report from the Government Accountability
Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-
139, or a program related to a program identified in the most
recent Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance.
DISCLOSURE OF DIRECTED RULE MAKINGS
Pursuant to section 3(k) of H. Res. 5, 113th Cong. (2013),
the Committee estimates that enacting H.R. 3 does not
specifically direct the completion of any specific rule makings
within the meaning of section 551 of title 5, United States
Code.
FEDERAL MANDATE 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 (Public Law 104-4).
PREEMPTION CLARIFICATION
Section 423 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974
requires the report of any Committee on a bill or joint
resolution to include a statement on the extent to which the
bill or joint resolution is intended to preempt state, local,
or tribal law. The Committee states that H.R. 3 does not
preempt any state, local, or tribal law. H.R. 3 preserves the
rights and permitting authority of states through which the
Keystone XL pipeline will be constructed.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT
No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b)
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act are created by this
legislation.
APPLICABILITY OF 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 (Public Law
104-1).
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF LEGISLATION
Section 1. Short title; Northern Route Approval Act
This section provides the title of the bill.
Section 2. Findings
In this section, Congress finds that: (1) investing in the
national infrastructure will boost the Nation's competitive
edge in energy, (2) importing oil from our ally Canada will be
in the national interest by lessening our dependency on foreign
oil, (3) the Keystone XL pipeline will provide thousands of new
job opportunities with labor-related benefits, (4) Nebraska has
reviewed and approved the reroute, (5) the Department of State
and other agencies have conducted studies and analyses of
Keystone's environmental, economic, and social impacts, (6)
pipeline transportation of oil is the safest and more
economically and environmentally effective means, and (7)
Keystone XL is in the same position as the Alaska Pipeline in
1973 prior to Congressional action and burdened by bureaucracy.
Section 3. Keystone XL permit approval
This section declares that no Presidential Permit is needed
for TransCanada's Keystone XL Pipeline as submitted in an
application filed on May 4, 2012 to the Department of State,
and supplemented by the Final Evaluation Report issued by the
Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality. This section also
states that the Final Environmental Impact Statement issued by
the Secretary of State on August 26, 2011, along with the Final
Evaluation Report, satisfies all requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and
the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.).
Section 4. Judicial review
Subsection (a) gives original and exclusive jurisdiction
(except for review by the Supreme Court on writ of certiorari)
to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit to resolve challenges regarding the validity of federal
agency or officer's final order for the construction or
maintenance of Keystone XL; the constitutionality of any
provision in the Act; and the adequacy of any environmental
impact statement prepared under NEPA.
Subsection (b) sets a 60-day deadline for filing any claims
under this Act.
Subsection (c) requires expedited consideration by the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit for any
action brought under subsection (a), taking into account the
national interest of energy security.
Section 5. American burying beetle
Subsection (a) finds that: (1) environmental reviews of the
Keystone XL project satisfy all the requirements of section 7
of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(2));
and (2) the Keystone XL project will not jeopardize the
American burying beetle's existence or modify or destroy its
critical habitat.
Subsection (b) deems the Secretary of the Interior to have
issued a written statement setting forth the biological opinion
that the Act is not a prohibited taking of the American burying
beetle under the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
Section 6. Right-of-way and temporary use permit
This section deems the Secretary of the Interior to have
granted a right-of-way and temporary use permit under section
28 of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 185) and the Federal
Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et
seq.).
Section 7. Permits for activities in navigable waters
Subsection (a) requires the Secretary of the Army to issue
all permits under Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) and section 10 of the Act of March
3, 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403) necessary for construction of Keystone
XL within 90 days of receipt of the application.
Subsection (b) gives the Secretary the authority to waive
any procedural requirements in order to accomplish the purposes
of this section.
Subsection (c) deems the permit required under subsection
(a) issued, if the Secretary of the Army does not issue such
permit within the timeframe required under subsection (a).
Subsection (d) limits the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency from prohibiting or restricting
any activity or use of an area under this section.
Section 8. Migratory Bird Treaty Act permit
This section deems the special purpose permit under the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.), as described
in the application with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for
the Keystone XL pipeline on January 11, 2013, issued.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED
H.R. 3 makes no changes in existing law.