119-HR-398 Investigative Journalist Impact Analysis

Summary

- What the bill does: Authorizes Interior/BLM to recover “reasonable” administrative and monitoring costs tied to geothermal leasing, drilling permits, inspections, and related approvals until September 30, 2032; allows fee reductions for hardship or to promote development; and requires a public 5‑year impact report. Collected amounts are credited as discretionary offsetting collections and are spendable only as provided in appropriations. [1]Congress.gov — Text - H.R.398 (119th): Geothermal Cost-Recovery Authority Act o…

- Why it matters: BLM currently lists several fixed geothermal filing fees but no geothermal drilling‑permit (GDP) fee and lacks a mechanism to charge for geothermal inspections, which hampers cost recovery compared with programs like oil & gas APDs and FLPMA rights‑of‑way. The committee report and BLM testimony confirm this gap. [2]BLM — BLM Fixed Filing Fee Schedule (FY2026) — Energy & Minerals

- Headline impacts: Economically, costs shift to applicants but may fund staffing that improves processing predictability; CBO expected negligible net direct‑spending effects from a near‑identical prior bill. Socially, increased geothermal build‑out would channel royalties to states and counties under existing law. Environmentally, geothermal offers low life‑cycle GHGs, with local risks (H2S, water use, induced seismicity for EGS) mitigated by reinjection, emission controls, and monitoring. [3]congress.gov

Economic Effects

Net effect depends on fee design, execution capacity, and market response. Evidence points to modest fiscal neutrality with potential throughput gains if collections translate into staffing and process rigor.

• Creates a geothermal user‑fee structure through 2032, letting BLM recover processing and inspection costs; fees can be reduced for hardship or to promote resource use. Appropriations gates still apply to spending the collections. [1]Congress.gov — Text - H.R.398 (119th): Geothermal Cost-Recovery Authority Act o…
• BLM currently posts fixed geothermal filing fees (e.g., lease applications, site licenses) but shows no GDP fee; by contrast oil & gas APDs carry a $12,850 fee—illustrating materiality even if geothermal fees ultimately differ. [2]BLM — BLM Fixed Filing Fee Schedule (FY2026) — Energy & Minerals
• BLM testimony confirms no geothermal drilling‑permit fee and no inspection‑fee mechanism today; the agency supports cost‑recovery authority to sustain a “responsive permitting process.” [4]Bureau of Land Management — BLM Testimony (Dec. 16, 2025) — Legislative Hearing…
• CBO assessed a near‑identical proposal (118th Congress) and expected negligible net effects on direct spending: fees in, then spent to run the program. That implies little macro‑budget change but potential program stability. [3]congress.gov
• Process capacity and timelines: DOE/committee materials note multi‑stage NEPA/permitting has led to longer timelines than many other federal power projects; dedicated funding could help address staffing bottlenecks, but outcomes hinge on execution and ongoing litigation risk. [5]Congress.gov — House EMR Oversight Hearing: "Letting Off Steam" (May 12, 2025)
• Market context: Geothermal provides high capacity factors (about 69% in 2023; ~66% in 2025), supporting stable revenue profiles if projects reach operation. [6]U.S. Energy Information Administration — Electric Power Monthly (March 2026), T…
• Cost benchmarks: NREL’s 2024 ATB provides current/future LCOE trajectories for hydrothermal and EGS; fee impacts are likely second‑order relative to resource risk and drilling success rates. [7]NREL — NREL Annual Technology Baseline 2024 — Geothermal
• Revenue sharing unaffected: Existing statute allocates 50% of federal geothermal royalties to the state and 25% to the county where the lease is located (Alaska differs). Localities therefore capture upside if development expands. [8]uscode.house.gov
• Rights‑of‑way precedent: BLM already recovers processing/monitoring costs for FLPMA rights‑of‑way via category schedules—an operational analogue for geothermal fee implementation. [9]BLM — BLM IM 2022-005 — Cost Recovery Processing and Monitoring Fee Schedule (R…

Social Effects

Distributional effects concentrate in rural Western communities where federal geothermal resources are leased.

• Royalty flows: States and counties receive statutory shares of royalties from federal geothermal leases, supporting local services and infrastructure where projects are sited. [8]uscode.house.gov
• Program revenues to governments: Interior reports substantial disbursements from federal energy leasing; renewables (including geothermal) have generated more than $0.5B in disbursements since FY2018—an indicator of potential community‑level benefits as projects scale. [10]U.S. Department of the Interior — Interior announces FY2021 disbursements from…
• Workforce and supply chain: DOE’s GeoVision and supporting “Impacts” analysis foresee employment growth tied to expanded geothermal deployment, contingent on overcoming permitting and subsurface challenges. [11]U.S. Department of Energy — DOE GeoVision — Harnessing the Heat Beneath Our Feet
• Equity considerations: User‑fee design can differentially affect small or first‑mover developers; H.R. 398’s hardship reduction authority is an explicit mitigation tool, but transparency in fee basis will matter to avoid chilling early‑stage exploration. [1]Congress.gov — Text - H.R.398 (119th): Geothermal Cost-Recovery Authority Act o…

Environmental Effects

Life‑cycle performance is favorable on climate metrics; site impacts hinge on technology (flash vs. binary vs. EGS), cooling choice, reinjection practices, and local geology/ecology.

• Life‑cycle GHGs: UNECE’s comparative LCA finds geothermal among the lowest‑emitting power options (tens of gCO2e/kWh), far below fossil generation. [12]UNECE — UNECE Life Cycle Assessment of Electricity Generation Options (2021)
• Operational emissions and controls: Geothermal plants can emit hydrogen sulfide and other non‑condensable gases; U.S. plants commonly use scrubbers and reinjection to control emissions. [13]U.S. Energy Information Administration — Geothermal energy and the environment
• Water use: Peer‑reviewed and federal analyses show wide ranges depending on plant and cooling type—air‑cooled binary can be very low, while flash with wet cooling is higher; reinjection reduces consumptive losses and supports reservoir pressure. [14]publications.anl.gov
• Induced seismicity: USGS identifies induced seismicity as a known, manageable risk in geothermal operations—especially for EGS—addressed via traffic‑light protocols, monitoring, and siting. [15]U.S. Geological Survey — USGS Circular 1509 — Induced Seismicity Strategic Visi…
• NEPA/monitoring frame: BLM’s process requires environmental review before operations plans and GDP approvals; site‑specific mitigation (wildlife, water, cultural resources) is addressed through these reviews and subsequent inspections. [16]U.S. Department of the Interior — BLM ePlanning — 2025 Geothermal Lease Sale Pr…

Temporal Analysis

1. Immediate (enactment → 1–2 years): Developers face new or higher application/inspection fees; BLM must stand up schedules and procedures. Because collections are “available only to the extent provided in advance in appropriations Acts,” near‑term throughput gains depend on appropriations language enabling timely use of receipts. [1]Congress.gov — Text - H.R.398 (119th): Geothermal Cost-Recovery Authority Act o…
2. Medium term (through FY2032 sunset): If implemented with transparent schedules and workload tracking, cost recovery can stabilize staffing and reduce pendency times in a program historically slowed by multi‑stage NEPA and litigation. Measurable outcomes should appear in the required 5‑year report. [5]Congress.gov — House EMR Oversight Hearing: "Letting Off Steam" (May 12, 2025)
3. Long term (post‑2032 policy choice): Congress must decide whether to reauthorize/modify. If geothermal deployment grows, climate and local revenue benefits scale; site‑specific environmental risks remain contingent on best‑practice execution (reinjection, monitoring, EGS seismic protocols). [12]UNECE — UNECE Life Cycle Assessment of Electricity Generation Options (2021)

Unintended Consequences

Assessment

Analytical stance (not advocacy) based on cited evidence.

Overall: Neutral. On balance, H.R. 398 formalizes a beneficiary‑pays model that can strengthen BLM’s geothermal program without material federal budget effects, provided appropriations enable timely use of collections. If paired with strong implementation (transparent fee schedules, hardship relief where warranted, and performance reporting), the policy likely improves permitting predictability—supporting a low‑carbon resource with manageable local risks. [3]congress.gov

Key Metrics

Reference values that frame likely consequences (context provided above).

Sourcing notes

Primary sources emphasized statutory text, official program documents, and federal data series; committee/hearing materials were cross‑checked against agency publications.

• Bill text and scope (authority, sunset, hardship, appropriations constraint). [1]Congress.gov — Text - H.R.398 (119th): Geothermal Cost-Recovery Authority Act o…
• Program gaps and agency position on H.R. 398. [4]Bureau of Land Management — BLM Testimony (Dec. 16, 2025) — Legislative Hearing…
• Committee report and CBO perspective on fiscal neutrality. [3]congress.gov
• Current BLM fee schedules (contrast with APD fees) and FLPMA ROW cost‑recovery model. [2]BLM — BLM Fixed Filing Fee Schedule (FY2026) — Energy & Minerals
• Permitting process references (GDP steps; NEPA sequencing). [17]Permitting Dashboard (performance.gov) — Permitting Dashboard — Geothermal Dril…
• Capacity‑factor benchmarks. [6]U.S. Energy Information Administration — Electric Power Monthly (March 2026), T…
• Lifecycle GHGs and environmental controls/risks (H2S, induced seismicity). [12]UNECE — UNECE Life Cycle Assessment of Electricity Generation Options (2021)
• Water‑use ranges and reinjection practices. [14]publications.anl.gov
• Royalty distribution and local fiscal effects; broader Interior disbursements context. [8]uscode.house.gov
• Market cost references (ATB) and deployment outlook (GeoVision). [7]NREL — NREL Annual Technology Baseline 2024 — Geothermal