PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 521.
Congressional Research Service
Version 79 · Reported to House without amendment · Dec 22, 2014
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Exploring for Geothermal Energy on Federal Lands Act - (Sec. 2) Exempts geothermal exploration test projects from environmental impact statement requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) if the project:
causes less than five acres of soil or vegetation disruption at the location of each well and no more than five additional acres of disruption during access or egress to the test site,
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
is developed no deeper than 2,500 feet and less than eight inches in diameter,
is developed in a manner that does not require off-road motorized access other than to and from the well site along an identified off-road route,
is developed without construction of new roads other than upgrading of existing drainage crossings for safety purposes and with the use of rubber-tired digging or drilling equipment vehicles,
is completed in less than 45 days, and
requires the restoration of the project site within three years to approximately the condition that existed at the time the project began, unless the site is subsequently used as part of energy development on the lease.
Requires a holder of a geothermal lease on federal land to notify the Department of the Interior within 30 days before the start of drilling under a geothermal exploration test project. Gives Interior 10 days to review a project and notify a leaseholder that the project is exempted from NEPA requirements or that project deficiencies preclude the exemption. Requires Interior to allow a leaseholder an opportunity to remedy any deficiencies before the date on which the leaseholder intended to start drilling.
People & committees
Rep. Labrador, Raul R. [R-ID-1] · R–ID
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 521.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 113-690.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 113-690.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1363 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1363 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1363 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1363 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.