{
  "id": "RL31427",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "RL31427",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 101258,
      "date": "2002-06-07",
      "retrieved": "2016-05-24T20:08:56.180941",
      "title": "Omnibus Energy Legislation: H.R. 4 Side-by-side Comparison",
      "summary": "The House and Senate have passed two distinct versions of an omnibus energy bill\n( H.R. 4 ), the first comprehensive energy legislation in ten years. The substantial\ndifferences between the two chambers' approaches to energy policy remain to be resolved in\nconference, which is expected to take place over the summer.\n  The House version of  H.R. 4 , the Securing America's Future Energy Act of 2001,\nwhich passed August 2, 2001, includes a key component of the Bush Administration's energy\nstrategy: opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to oil and gas exploration and\ndevelopment. The Senate version, the Energy Policy Act of 2002, approved on April 25, 2002,\nleaves ANWR off-limits to drilling.\n  The electricity provisions of the Senate-passed H.R.  4 would continue to change the\nregulatory requirements for the wholesale electric market. The House-passed H.R.  4 does\nnot contain electricity provisions. In general, the Senate version would repeal the Public Utility\nHolding Company Act (PUHCA) and give the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and\nthe state utility commissions access to utility books and records. It would also repeal the mandatory\npurchase requirement of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA) when FERC finds that\na competitive electric market exists.\n  Automobile and light truck fuel efficiency was the subject of considerable debate in both\nhouses. In its version of H.R.  4, the House included language that calls for a reduction of\n5 billion gallons in light-duty truck fuel consumption over the period of model years 2004-2010. \nThe Senate version would charge the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)\nwith development of new Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards using the\nadministrative procedure that, since FY1996, the agency had been enjoined by Congress from\ninitiating. However, the Senate bill also would freeze \"pickup trucks\" at the current light truck\nstandard of 20.7 mpg, likely shifting the burden for achieving savings to the passenger automobile\nportion of the fleet.\n  Both versions of H.R.  4 include a package of energy tax cuts, primarily tax incentives\n(or subsidies) for qualifying energy producers and consumers. In terms of revenue loss, the House\nbill cuts energy taxes by $35.4 billion over the ten-year period from FY2002 through FY2011. In\ncontrast, the Senate bill's ten-year projected revenue loss is about $15.2 billion. The House bill\nprovides a greater tax cut for fossil fuel supply -- about $17 billion more over ten years -- than the\nSenate bill.\n  Several significant provisions are contained only in the Senate-passed bill, including programs\nto address global climate change, loan and price guarantees for a proposed Alaska natural gas\npipeline, a cutoff of oil imports from Iraq, minimum renewable energy content in motor vehicle fuel,\nand renewable energy requirements for electricity providers.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RL31427",
          "sha1": "29059b9c7dd5645ef46e8966d4b45d6289c7ac9d",
          "filename": "files/20020607_RL31427_29059b9c7dd5645ef46e8966d4b45d6289c7ac9d.pdf",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20020607_RL31427_29059b9c7dd5645ef46e8966d4b45d6289c7ac9d.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Energy Policy",
    "Science and Technology Policy"
  ]
}