PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial And Antitrust Law.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 1, 2013
Domestic Energy Production Protection Act of 2013 - Requires the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to submit for analysis by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) a proposed rule or guidance under the Clean Air Act that may reduce the level of energy output in a specified sector before such a rule or guidance may take effect. Defines "specified sector" as one of the nine sectors of energy production listed in the document entitled "Annual Energy Outlook 2013: With Projections to 2040," published by the U.S. Energy Information Administration in April 2013.
Requires the Administrator of OIRA (Administrator), within 90 days of receiving the proposed rule or guidance, to conduct an analysis to determine if such rule or guidance, individually or when combined with another final rule or guidance issued by EPA, will reduce the level of energy output in a specified sector below the level of the prior year. Requires such analysis to include the potential impact of the rule or guidance on energy output in such sectors and any potential job losses over a period of 10 years.
Requires the Administrator to report to Congress after making a determination that a proposed rule or guidance would reduce such energy output. Prohibits such rule or guidance that is the subject of a report from taking effect unless Congress enacts a joint resolution approving it. Establishes a process for approving a rule or guidance by a joint resolution.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Removes rules promulgated pursuant to this Act from the established process for review of agency rulemaking, if a rulemaking will reduce energy output.
Defines "energy output" as the level of production for a year, measured in quadrillion Btu, as calculated and included in such document.
People & committees
Rep. Shuster, Bill [R-PA-9] · R–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial And Antitrust Law.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Power.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on the Judiciary, and Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on the Judiciary, and Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on the Judiciary, and Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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: Aug 12, 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.2916 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.2916 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.2916 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.2916 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.