USA – TEXAS Trends and Developments Contributed by: Gerald J. Pels, Gerald D. Higdon, James Beers, Jr., Elizabeth Corey and Brett A. Miller, Troutman Pepper Locke
suspend or revoke rules it deems to be impact- ing the industry. At this time, it is unclear whether the adminis- tration intends to push the bounds of such an emergency declaration. As this is new ground, it is difficult to predict what actions could be taken and whether they would ultimately survive judi- cial challenge. That said, the EO declaring an emergency details certain actions that will have a direct effect on the environmental regulation of the energy industry. Importantly and interest- ingly, the EO’s definition of “energy” does not mention or assume solar or wind as a resource. EO 14156 declares a national emergency to fos- ter energy and mineral production necessary to meet the “high demand for energy and natural resources to power the next generation of tech- nology”. The EO’s stated goal, among others, is to expedite the federal permitting and review functions required for energy development and infrastructure projects. The EO directly calls on the Army Corps of Engineers to undertake action to facilitate energy development. Likewise, it seeks to streamline consultation under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and directs the Secretaries of the Interior, Energy and Defense Departments to identify vulnerabilities in US transportation and refining infrastructure. Some commentators argue that emergency con- ditions do not exist given that oil and gas pro- duction are at or near record levels. The adminis- tration, however, appears to believe that national security will be strengthened in the future by: • promoting oil and gas investment; and • fostering higher returns on that investment in order to (among other things) meet the energy requirements of the data centres that will be
needed to ensure that the USA is at the lead- ing edge of the artificial intelligence (AI) race. In that sense, the emergency declaration aligns with the administration’s goal of more effective- ly competing with China – that is, to the extent investment in and return on US energy produc- tion is hastened, the USA should be positioned to better supply its allies with fossil fuel exports, while undercutting other countries’ dependence on China’s energy exports, such as liquefied nat- ural gas (LNG). Unleashing American energy: EO14154 This EO requires administrative agencies to identify and review regulations, orders, guid- ance documents, settlements, consent orders and other agency actions to determine whether they pose an undue burden on energy produc- tion, and, if so, to develop an action plan to miti- gate inefficiencies. The EO specifically requires efficient permitting and encourages utilisation of general permitting and permits by rule. The EO also lifts a moratorium on US permits to export LNG. The Biden administration halted the issu- ance of these authorisations based largely on climate concerns. By lifting barriers to LNG exports, the Order positions the USA to better compete with China. EOs and agency actions affecting climate change regulation The Trump administration rapidly took steps to offset EOs and other policy decisions by the Biden administration that were designed to foster the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Some commentators assert that the Biden administration sought to “pick winners” by establishing regulations so stringent that com- pliance by the fossil fuel industry would not be reasonably possible. The Trump administration, on the other hand, has issued EOs that appear
364 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook