HB398, the Geothermal Cost-Recovery Authority Act of 2025, would amend the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 to let the Department of the Interior recover certain administrative and oversight costs from geothermal lease applicants and leaseholders. For the period from enactment through September 30, 2032, the Secretary of the Interior could require reimbursement for costs tied to processing geothermal lease applications and related approvals, as well as inspecting and monitoring exploration, drilling, plugging, abandonment, construction, operation, termination, and reclamation activities. The bill also allows the Secretary to reduce reimbursement in cases of economic hardship or when a lower amount would better promote geothermal development.
The bill further directs that reimbursed amounts be credited to the relevant Interior Department accounts as discretionary offsetting collections and used only for the geothermal leasing and inspection functions described in the bill, subject to appropriations. In addition, the bill requires the Secretary of the Interior to submit a report within five years assessing the effect of these changes on the Bureau of Land Management’s geothermal program, recommending whether the cost-recovery authority should be reauthorized, and suggesting any other program updates. The Secretary must consult with the geothermal industry and other stakeholders and make the report publicly available.
The bill’s impact on state laws is limited, because it is a federal public-lands and energy-management measure rather than a state regulatory change. Its main legal effect would be on the Department of the Interior’s authority under federal geothermal leasing law, especially for applicants and operators working on federal lands or under federal geothermal leases. It would shift some program costs from the federal government to private geothermal applicants and leaseholders, while preserving agency discretion to lower charges in certain circumstances.
The available context shows little recorded controversy or formal opposition. There are no committee transcripts or votes provided, and the bill’s status indicates it was placed on the Union Calendar, suggesting it advanced procedurally in the House. Based on the text, the likely general sentiment is supportive of improving agency cost recovery and program administration, with an emphasis on making geothermal permitting and oversight more self-sustaining while still encouraging development through hardship and policy-based reductions.
Notable points of contention, if any arise, would likely center on whether cost recovery could increase expenses for geothermal developers, potentially affecting project economics and permitting timelines. Supporters would likely view the bill as a practical administrative measure that helps fund federal oversight of geothermal leasing and inspection, while critics might argue that added fees could discourage investment or slow deployment of geothermal energy. The bill tries to address that concern by allowing reduced reimbursement when full cost recovery would create hardship or impede the greatest use of geothermal resources.
HB398 would amend section 6 of the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 to authorize the Department of the Interior to collect reimbursement for specified geothermal leasing, permitting, inspection, and monitoring costs through September 30, 2032. It would also require those collections to be credited to Interior accounts as offsetting collections and used for geothermal program administration, subject to appropriations. The bill would not directly alter state statutes, but it would affect federal geothermal lease applicants, leaseholders, and the Bureau of Land Management’s geothermal program.
No votes or committee debate are provided, and there is no recorded opposition in the supplied materials. The bill’s text suggests a generally pragmatic, pro-administration sentiment: it aims to give Interior a mechanism to recover costs associated with geothermal oversight while preserving flexibility to reduce charges for hardship or to encourage geothermal development. Overall, the measure appears intended to support program efficiency rather than to impose a major policy shift.
The main potential point of contention is the cost burden on geothermal developers and leaseholders, who could be required to reimburse the federal government for application processing and inspection costs. Opponents could argue that these fees may raise project costs or discourage geothermal investment, while supporters would likely argue that the federal government should not bear the full cost of regulating private development on public lands. The bill addresses this tension by allowing the Secretary to reduce reimbursement for economic hardship or to promote the greatest use of geothermal resources.