Federal Land Freedom Act This bill sets forth a process that allows a state (including the District of Columbia) to seek to transfer the responsibility of energy development on available federal land within its boundaries from the federal government to the state. Available federal land does not include land that, as of May 31, 2013, is (1) held for the benefit of an Indian tribe, (2) in the National Park System, (3) in the National Wildlife Refuge System, or (4) in a congressionally designated wilderness area. To qualify for such a transfer of responsibility, a state must have a program that regulates the exploration and development of oil, natural gas, and other forms of energy on its land. The federal responsibility transfers to the state once the state submits to the Department of the Interior, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Energy a declaration that it has such a program and that it seeks to transfer the responsibility. Any action taken by a state to lease, permit, or regulate the exploration and development of energy on federal land in lieu of the federal government is not subject to the Administrative Procedure Act, the National Historic Preservation Act, the Endangered Species Act of 1973, or the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
The implications of HB 98 extend significantly into state and federal law concerning the management of natural resources. If enacted, the bill would transfer the regulatory powers from federal entities to state governments, allowing states to operate without the traditional federal oversight that governs the leasing and environmental assessment processes. This could potentially streamline energy production but also raises concerns regarding environmental protections that are typically enforced under federal law, including the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.
House Bill 98, titled the 'Federal Land Freedom Act', seeks to enhance domestic energy independence by granting states the authority to manage the development and production of energy from available federal lands. The bill specifies that states (including the District of Columbia) can assume responsibility for energy development on federal land within their boundaries, provided they establish an adequate regulatory program for energy exploration and production based on state law. The types of available federal land exclude designated areas such as national parks and lands held in trust for Indian tribes.
Notably, the bill has sparked debate regarding the potential environmental impacts of such a transfer of control. Supporters argue that state management of these lands could lead to more efficient energy production and lower regulatory burdens on companies looking to extract resources. Conversely, opponents fear that states may prioritize economic gains over environmental safeguards, potentially leading to increased ecological degradation. The lack of federal oversight could limit comprehensive assessments of environmental impacts that are crucial for sustainable resource management.