H. Rept. 115-921 - STREAMLINING PERMITTING EFFICIENCIES IN ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ACT115th Congress (2017-2018)
Committee Report
Hide Overview| Report Type: | House Report |
|---|---|
| Accompanies: | H.R.6088 |
| Committees: |
Report text available as:
- TXT
- PDF (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?
115th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session } { 115-921
======================================================================
STREAMLINING PERMITTING EFFICIENCIES IN ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ACT
_______
September 6, 2018.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on
the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Bishop of Utah, from the Committee on Natural Resources, submitted
the following
R E P O R T
together with
DISSENTING VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 6088]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred
the bill (H.R. 6088) to amend the Mineral Leasing Act to
authorize notifications of permit to drill, and for other
purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon
with an amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do
pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Streamlining Permitting Efficiencies
in Energy Development Act'' or the ``SPEED Act''.
SEC. 2. NOTIFICATIONS OF PERMIT TO DRILL.
The Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.) is amended by--
(1) redesignating section 44 as section 45; and
(2) inserting after section 43 the following:
``SEC. 44. NOTIFICATIONS OF PERMIT TO DRILL.
``(a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this section, the Secretary shall establish procedures by
which an operator may conduct drilling and production activities on
available Federal land and non-Federal land after sending to the
Secretary a notification of permit to drill under this section in lieu
of obtaining an APD.
``(b) Content of Notification.--To be considered a complete
notification of permit to drill under this section, an operator shall
include in the notification of permit to drill submitted under this
section--
``(1) a notification of permit to drill form;
``(2) a surface use plan of operations;
``(3) a drilling plan;
``(4) a well plat certified by a registered surveyor;
``(5) an operator certification;
``(6) evidence of bond coverage; and
``(7) a notification of permit to drill fee in an amount to
be determined by the Secretary.
``(c) Justifications for Objection.--
``(1) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this
subsection, the Secretary may not object to a notification of
permit to drill under this section if the notification--
``(A) demonstrates that the drilling operations
described in the notification of permit to drill will
be located in--
``(i) a developed field, where there are
existing oil and gas wells within a 5-mile
radius and for which an approved land use plan
or environmental review was prepared within the
last 10 years under the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
that analyzed such drilling operations as a
reasonably foreseeable activity;
``(ii) a location or well pad site at which
drilling has occurred within 10 years before
the date of spudding the well and the proposed
operations do not increase the surface
disturbance on the location or well pad site;
``(iii) an area consisting of individual
surface disturbances of less than 10 acres and
the total surface disturbance on the lease is
not greater than 150 acres and for which an
approved land use plan or environmental review
was prepared within the last 10 years under the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) that analyzed such
drilling operations as a reasonably foreseeable
activity;
``(iv) an area consisting of Federal mineral
interests that is located within the boundaries
of a communitization agreement or unit
agreement which contains minerals leased by a
State or private mineral owner for which a
drilling permit has been approved by a State
regulatory agency; or
``(v) an area in which a categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
applies for oil and gas drilling or re-entry
activities; or
``(B) includes--
``(i) an environmental review that concludes
that actions described in the notification of
permit to drill pose no significant effects on
the human environment or threatened or
endangered species; and
``(ii) an archeological review that concludes
that actions described in the notification of
permit to drill pose no significant effects on
cultural or historic properties or resources.
``(2) Endangered species protection.--
``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the
Secretary shall object to a notification of permit to
drill if the activity described in such notification of
permit to drill is likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of a species that is a threatened species or
endangered species under the Endangered Species Act of
1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) or result in the
destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat
of such species.
``(B) Withdrawal of objection.--The Secretary may
withdraw an objection under subparagraph (A) if the
operator consults with the Secretary on such objection
and places conditions on the notification of permit to
drill sufficient to comply with the Endangered Species
Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
``(3) National historic preservation.--
``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the
Secretary shall object to a notification of permit to
drill if the activity described in such notification of
permit to drill is likely to affect properties listed,
or eligible for listing, in the National Register of
Historic Places under section 306108 of title 54,
United States Code (commonly known as the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966).
``(B) Withdrawal of objection.--The Secretary may
withdraw an objection under subparagraph (A) if the
operator consults with the Secretary on such objection
and places conditions on the notification of permit to
drill sufficient to comply with section 306108 of title
54, United States Code (commonly known as the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966).
``(d) Objection or No Action.--
``(1) Notification of incomplete notification.--Not later
than 15 days after receipt of a notification of permit to
drill, or a revised notification of permit to drill, from an
operator under this section, the Secretary shall notify the
operator in writing if the notification of permit to drill is
not complete.
``(2) Notification of objections.--Not later than 45 days
after receipt of a complete notification of permit to drill
from an operator under this section, the Secretary shall review
the notification of permit to drill and--
``(A) notify the operator in writing of any
objections to the notification of permit to drill; or
``(B) take no action.
``(3) No action required.--If the Secretary has not notified
an operator under either paragraph (1) or paragraph (2) within
45 days after receipt of a notification of permit to drill from
the operator under this section, the operator may, without
further action from the Secretary, conduct the drilling and
production activities for which the notification of permit to
drill was submitted.
``(4) Opportunity to resubmit notification.--If the Secretary
notifies an operator under paragraph (1) of an incomplete
notification or paragraph (2) of an objection, the Secretary
shall allow the operator to address such incomplete
notification or objection and revise and resubmit the
notification of permit to drill.
``(5) Opportunity to resubmit notification as apd.--If the
Secretary notifies an operator under paragraph (2) of an
objection, the Secretary shall allow the operator to resubmit
such information in the form of an APD.
``(e) Notification Fee.--The Secretary may not charge an operator
under this section a fee for submitting a notification of permit to
drill greater than the fee the Secretary charges an applicant for an
APD.
``(f) Environmental Review.--
``(1) In general.--An environmental review or archeological
review described in subsection (c)(1)(B) may be completed by a
third-party contractor approved by the Secretary or pursuant to
a memorandum of understanding between the operator and the
Secretary.
``(2) Field work authorization.--The Secretary shall issue a
field work authorization to a third-party contractor for the
purposes of paragraph (1) within a reasonable time.
``(3) Request for concurrence.--The Secretary shall allow a
third-party contractor to submit a request to the State
Historic Preservation Office on behalf of the Secretary.
``(g) Additional Surface Use Permits.--The Secretary may not require
an operator that has submitted a notification of permit to drill for
which the Secretary did not object to obtain a surface use permit for
an action included in the notification of permit to drill.
``(h) Site Inspection.--The Secretary may not require an operator
that has submitted a notification of permit to drill for which the
Secretary did not object to submit to a site inspection before
commencement of the activities described in the notification of permit
to drill.
``(i) Federal Enforcement.--The Secretary may conduct inspections of
and evaluate activities described in a notification of permit to drill
for purposes of bringing an enforcement action. The Secretary may
suspend enforcement proceedings if the operator modifies its activities
to comply with the notification of permit to drill or obtains an APD
for such activities.
``(j) Application of NEPA.--
``(1) No action by secretary.--The decision by the Secretary
to take no action under subsection (c)(1)(B)(2) shall not
constitute a major Federal action under section 102(2)(C) of
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C.
4332(2)(C)).
``(2) Development of regulations.--The development of any
regulation pursuant to this section shall constitute a major
Federal action under section 102(2)(C) of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)).
``(k) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) APD.--The term `APD' means an application to drill or
re-enter a well.
``(2) Available federal land.--The term `available Federal
land' means Federal land that--
``(A) is located within the boundaries of a State;
``(B) is not held by the United States in trust for
the benefit of a federally recognized Indian Tribe;
``(C) is not a unit of the National Park System;
``(D) is not a unit of the National Wildlife Refuge
System;
``(E) is not a Congressionally-approved wilderness
area under the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.);
and
``(F) is managed by the Director of the Bureau of
Land Management or the Chief of the U.S. Forest
Service.
``(3) Drilling operations.--The term `drilling operations'
means the drilling or re-entry of a well.
``(4) Drilling plan.--The term `drilling plan' means a plan
containing--
``(A) a description of the drilling program;
``(B) the surface and projected completion zone
location;
``(C) pertinent geologic data;
``(D) expected hazards;
``(E) proposed mitigation measures to address such
hazards;
``(F) any other information specified in applicable
notices or orders; and
``(G) any other pertinent data as the Secretary may
require.
``(5) Surface use plan of operation.--The term `surface use
plan of operation' means a plan containing--
``(A) the road and drill pad location;
``(B) details of pad construction;
``(C) methods for containment and disposal of waste
material;
``(D) plans for reclamation of the surface;
``(E) any other information specified in applicable
orders or notices; and
``(F) any other pertinent data as the Secretary may
require.''.
Purpose of the Bill
The purpose of H.R. 6088 is to amend the Mineral Leasing
Act to authorize notifications of permit to drill.
Background and Need for Legislation
Under the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.), oil
and gas operators are required to submit an application for
permit to drill (APD) for drilling activities on federal
lands.\1\ Due to extensive regulatory requirements and lengthy
environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) has accumulated a significant backlog of APDs,
some of which have been pending for a year or more.\2\ In fact,
in 2017, BLM processed APDs in an average of 260 days.\3\ By
comparison, States with oil and gas regulatory programs process
drilling permits for activities on State and private land in an
average of 30 days.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\30 U.S.C. 181.
\2\Letter from Brian Steed, Deputy Director of Policy and Programs,
Department of the Interior, to Senator Mike Enzi, February 26, 2018.
\3\Bureau of Land Management. Oil and Gas Statistics. https://
www.blm.gov/programs/energy-and-minerals/oil-and-gas/oil-and-gas-
statistics.
\4\Western Energy Alliance. Knowledge Center. Onshore Development.
https://www.westernenergyalliance.org/knowledge-center/land/onshore-
development/permitting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the Mineral Leasing Act, the Department of the
Interior must evaluate the surface impacts of drilling
activities proposed in APDs before approval.\5\ BLM must
analyze the surface use plan and drilling plan submitted in
each application and determine the potential impacts of
proposed drilling activities on endangered or threatened
species, cultural artifacts, historic sites and the human
environment. While certain drilling activities have greater
environmental impacts than others, each application is subject
to review by BLM under NEPA. Some drilling activities may have
a very insignificant impact on the environment, yet
applications for their approval must wait in line behind other
applications that require extensive environmental review and
analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\30 U.S.C. 181.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This legislation would authorize a permitting program
tailored to the approval of drilling operations that would have
little or no environmental impact. Under this program, an oil
and gas operator could submit a notification of permit to drill
(NPD) in lieu of an APD if the proposed drilling activities
meet certain criteria and do not pose environmental risk. This
bill establishes criteria that each NPD must meet. If an NPD
meets all the statutory and regulatory requirements, BLM does
not need to take further action to approve the permit once
submitted, as approval is granted by meeting the requirements
set forth in statute. BLM will not be required to conduct any
site inspections or environmental review under NEPA for
individual NPDs submitted by operators.
This legislation will streamline the federal oil and gas
permitting process by allowing BLM to expedite the approval of
drilling activities that pose little or no environmental harm.
The authorization of an NPD program will reduce the time and
personnel needed to approve such drilling operations, allowing
BLM to prioritize its limited resources on reviewing activities
that have a larger environmental footprint.
Specifically, H.R. 6088 amends the Mineral Leasing Act to
authorize an NPD program. Operators or lessees may submit an
NPD for drilling and production activities on exploratory,
development and service wells on federal oil and gas leases in
lieu of an APD, if applicable. An applicant must include
similar information required by the APD process, as well as any
other information required by order, notice or regulation
issued by the Secretary of the Interior. To be considered for
the NPD process, an applicant must either demonstrate that the
proposed drilling operations are located in a developed field
for which an approved land use plan or recent NEPA analysis
exists; operations do not increase the surface disturbance at
the proposed site; the proposed operations will impact less
than ten acres so long as the total surface disturbance of a
lease is less than 150 acres and for which an approved land use
plan or NEPA analysis exists; the proposed activity is within
the boundaries of a communitization or unit agreement
containing minerals leased by a State or private mineral owner
for which a State regulatory body has approved a permit; or a
NEPA categorical exclusion applies. Alternatively, the NPD can
include an environmental review concluding the actions
authorized under the NPD pose no significant effects under NEPA
to threatened or endangered species or cultural or historic
properties or resources. Such environmental and archaeological
reviews may be completed by third-party contractors pre-
approved by BLM.
Upon receipt of an NPD, the Secretary of the Interior has
15 days to inform the applicant if the NPD is incomplete. If
the Secretary finds that a completed NPD does not sufficiently
meet the criteria listed above, the Secretary may issue
objections to an NPD and the operator may respond to resolve
any objections.
After receiving a completed NPD, the Secretary has 45 days
to issue any written objections to the NPD. If no objections
are issued, drilling and production activities described in the
NPD can commence without further approval from the Secretary.
Upon receipt of any written objections, the applicant may
resubmit the NPD or resubmit such information as an APD.
The Secretary may object to an NPD if it is likely that the
proposed actions therein will jeopardize the continued
existence of a threatened or endangered species listed under
the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.) or cause harm to cultural artifacts or sites protected
under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA, 54 U.S.C.
300101 et seq.). The Secretary may require consultations under
ESA or NHPA and attach conditions to an NPD based on those
consultations.
Unlike the approval process for APDs, the Secretary may not
require site inspections for NPDs. However, the Secretary may
conduct inspections of and evaluate activities authorized by
any NPD for enforcement action.
The Secretary may not require any additional surface use
permits for actions authorized under an NPD.
Individual NPDs will not be subject to further analysis
under NEPA, but the development of any regulations pursuant to
this legislation shall be considered a major federal action
under NEPA.
Committee Action
H.R. 6088 was introduced on June 13, 2018, by Congressman
John R. Curtis (R-UT). The bill was referred to the Committee
on Natural Resources. The Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral
Resources held a hearing on a draft version of this bill on
June 6, 2018. On June 20, 2018, the Natural Resources Committee
met to consider the bill. Congressman Curtis offered an
amendment designated #1; it was adopted by voice vote.
Congressman Raul M. Grijalva (D-AZ) offered an amendment
designated 001; it was not adopted by a roll call vote of 18
ayes and 21 nays, as follows:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Committee adjourned before completing action on the
bill. On June 27, 2018, the Committee met to again consider the
bill. Congressman Rob Bishop (R-UT) offered an amendment
designated #1; it was adopted by voice vote. Congressman Raul
M. Grijalva (D-AZ) offered another amendment designated 001; it
was not adopted by a roll call vote of 11 ayes and 17 nays, as
follows:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Congressman A. Donald McEachin (D-VA) offered an amendment
designated 003; it was not adopted by a roll call vote of 12
ayes and 18 nays, as follows:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Congressman Jared Huffman (R-CA) offered an amendment
designated 154; it was not adopted by a roll call vote of 12
ayes and 18 nays, as follows:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
No additional amendments were offered, and the bill, as
amended, was ordered favorably reported to the House of
Representatives by a roll call vote of 18 ayes and 12 nays, as
follows:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations
Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee on Natural Resources' oversight findings and
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.
Compliance With House Rule XIII and Congressional Budget Act
1. Cost of Legislation and the Congressional Budget Act.
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) and (3) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and
sections 308(a) and 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974, the Committee has received the following estimate for the
bill from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, August 30, 2018.
Hon. Rob Bishop,
Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 6088, the SPEED
Act.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them, The CBO staff contact is Jeff LaFave.
Sincerely,
Keith Hall,
Director.
Enclosure.
H.R. 6088--SPEED Act
Summary: H.R. 6088 would require the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) to allow oil and gas producers to perform
certain drilling activities on federal lands by obtaining a
notification for permit to drill (NPD) in lieu of an
application for permit to drill (APD). BLM could approve NPDs
without completing the site inspections or environmental
reviews that are required for APDs. When submitting an NPD, oil
and gas producers would pay a fee that CBO expects would be the
same as the fee for an APD. However, unlike with APDs, the
agency would not have the same authority to spend those fees.
CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 6088 would reduce direct
spending by $125 million over the 2020-2026 period; therefore,
pay-as-you-go procedures apply. In addition, CBO estimates that
implementing the bill would cost $125 million over the 2020-
2026 period, subject to appropriation of the necessary amounts.
Enacting the bill would not affect revenues.
CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 6088 would not increase
net direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four
consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2029.
H.R. 6088 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA).
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary effect of H.R. 6088 is shown in the following table.
The costs of the legislation fall within budget function 300
(natural resources and environment).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2019-2023 2019-2028
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DECREASES INDIRECT SPENDING
Estimated Budget Authority.................... 0 0 -16 -17 -17 -18 -18 -19 -20 0 0 -68 -125
Estimated Outlays............................. 0 0 -16 -17 -17 -18 -18 -19 -20 0 0 -68 -125
INCREASES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Estimated Authorization Level................. 0 0 16 17 17 18 18 19 20 0 0 68 125
Estimated Outlays............................. 0 0 16 17 17 18 18 19 20 0 0 68 125
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that the
legislation will be enacted late in 2018 and that the necessary
amounts will be appropriated for each fiscal year.
Direct spending
CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 6088 would reduce direct
spending by $125 million over the 2020-2026 period.
Spending of Permit Fees. Under current law, BLM charges oil
and gas producers a fee to submit an APD, and, over the 2020-
2026 period, the agency will have the authority to spend all
proceeds from those fees, without further appropriation, to
administer oil and gas permitting. In 2017, the agency received
APD fees totaling $31 million. CBO expects that, over the 2020-
2026 period, those fees will range from $33 million to $39
million and that BLM will spend those amounts annually. The
agency's authority to charge APD fees expires after 2026.
Under H.R. 6088, BLM would be required to authorize, within
one year of enactment, drilling on federal lands by issuing
NPDs in lieu of APDs for activities that meet certain criteria.
Using information provided by BLM, CBO expects that about half
of all permit applicants could operate with NPDs. Because CBO
expects that the fee to obtain an NPD would be the same as the
APD fee, total receipts from permits authorizing drilling on
federal lands would not change. However, because BLM would not
have the authority to spend NPD fees, CBO estimates that
enacting the bill would reduce direct spending by an average of
about $18 million a year over the 2020-2026 period.
Royalties from Oil and Gas Production. Under the bill, oil
and gas producers that submitted NPDs would not be required to
undergo the site inspections or complete the environmental
analyses that are required for APDs. CBO expects that
eliminating those requirement could expedite permitting for
some NPDs. However, using information from BLM, CBO estimates
that companies that obtained NPDs would be authorized to begin
drilling operations only a few days sooner than if they had
obtained APDs for the same activities. In addition, BLM could
object to certain NPDs, which could lengthen the time required
to obtain those NPDs beyond that required to obtain APDs for
the same activities. On net, CBO estimates, enacting the bill
would have no significant effect on the timing or quantity of
oil and gas produced on federal lands and would not
significantly affect royalty payments received by the federal
government over the 2020-2028 period.
Spending subject to appropriation
Under current law, over the 2020-2026 period, BLM can
retain and spend, without further appropriation, all fees paid
by oil and gas producers for APDs. The agency uses those funds
to carry out a range of activities that support the processing
of permits for oil and gas drilling. Because H.R. 6088 would
reduce the amounts available for those purposes by $125 million
over the 2020-2026 period, CBO estimates that BLM would need
that amount to continue to process permits at the same rate as
under current law. Such spending would be subject to the
availability of appropriated funds.
Pay-As-You-Go considerations: The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go
Act of 2010 establishes budget-reporting and enforcement
procedures for legislation affecting direct spending or
revenues. The net changes in outlays that are subject to those
pay-as-you-go procedures are shown in the following table.
CBO ESTIMATE OF PAY-AS-YOU-GO EFFECTS FOR H.R. 6088, THE SPEED ACT, AS ORDERED REPORTED BY THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES ON JUNE 27, 2018
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2018-2023 2018-2028
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NET DECREASE IN THE DEFICIT
Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Effect................ 0 0 -16 -17 -17 -18 -18 -19 -20 0 0 -68 -125
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Increase in long-term direct spending and deficits: CBO
estimates that enacting H.R. 6088 would not increase net direct
spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive
10-year periods beginning in 2029.
Mandates: H.R. 6088 contains no intergovernmental or
private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA.
Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Jeff LaFave, Mandates:
Jon Sperl.
Estimate reviewed by: Kim P. Cawley, Chief, Natural and
Physical Resources Cost Estimating Unit; H. Samuel Papenfuss,
Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.
2. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by
clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or
objective of this bill is to amend the Mineral Leasing Act to
authorize notifications of permit to drill.
Earmark Statement
This bill does not contain any Congressional earmarks,
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined
under clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI of the Rules of
the House of Representatives.
Compliance With Public Law 104-4
This bill contains no unfunded mandates.
Compliance With H. Res. 5
Directed Rule Making. This bill does not contain any
directed rule makings.
Duplication of Existing Programs. This bill does not
establish or reauthorize a program of the federal government
known to be duplicative of another program. Such program was
not included in any report from the Government Accountability
Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139
or identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance published pursuant to the Federal Program
Information Act (Public Law 95-220, as amended by Public Law
98-169) as relating to other programs.
Preemption of State, Local or Tribal Law
This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or
tribal law.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italic, and existing law in which no
change is proposed is shown in roman):
MINERAL LEASING ACT
* * * * * * *
SEC. 44. NOTIFICATIONS OF PERMIT TO DRILL.
(a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this section, the Secretary shall establish
procedures by which an operator may conduct drilling and
production activities on available Federal land and non-Federal
land after sending to the Secretary a notification of permit to
drill under this section in lieu of obtaining an APD.
(b) Content of Notification.--To be considered a complete
notification of permit to drill under this section, an operator
shall include in the notification of permit to drill submitted
under this section--
(1) a notification of permit to drill form;
(2) a surface use plan of operations;
(3) a drilling plan;
(4) a well plat certified by a registered surveyor;
(5) an operator certification;
(6) evidence of bond coverage; and
(7) a notification of permit to drill fee in an
amount to be determined by the Secretary.
(c) Justifications for Objection.--
(1) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this
subsection, the Secretary may not object to a
notification of permit to drill under this section if
the notification--
(A) demonstrates that the drilling operations
described in the notification of permit to
drill will be located in--
(i) a developed field, where there
are existing oil and gas wells within a
5-mile radius and for which an approved
land use plan or environmental review
was prepared within the last 10 years
under the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
that analyzed such drilling operations
as a reasonably foreseeable activity;
(ii) a location or well pad site at
which drilling has occurred within 10
years before the date of spudding the
well and the proposed operations do not
increase the surface disturbance on the
location or well pad site;
(iii) an area consisting of
individual surface disturbances of less
than 10 acres and the total surface
disturbance on the lease is not greater
than 150 acres and for which an
approved land use plan or environmental
review was prepared within the last 10
years under the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.) that analyzed such drilling
operations as a reasonably foreseeable
activity;
(iv) an area consisting of Federal
mineral interests that is located
within the boundaries of a
communitization agreement or unit
agreement which contains minerals
leased by a State or private mineral
owner for which a drilling permit has
been approved by a State regulatory
agency; or
(v) an area in which a categorical
exclusion under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) applies for oil
and gas drilling or re-entry
activities; or
(B) includes--
(i) an environmental review that
concludes that actions described in the
notification of permit to drill pose no
significant effects on the human
environment or threatened or endangered
species; and
(ii) an archeological review that
concludes that actions described in the
notification of permit to drill pose no
significant effects on cultural or
historic properties or resources.
(2) Endangered species protection.--
(A) In general.--Notwithstanding paragraph
(1), the Secretary shall object to a
notification of permit to drill if the activity
described in such notification of permit to
drill is likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of a species that is a threatened
species or endangered species under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531
et seq.) or result in the destruction or
adverse modification of critical habitat of
such species.
(B) Withdrawal of objection.--The Secretary
may withdraw an objection under subparagraph
(A) if the operator consults with the Secretary
on such objection and places conditions on the
notification of permit to drill sufficient to
comply with the Endangered Species Act of 1973
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
(3) National historic preservation.--
(A) In general.--Notwithstanding paragraph
(1), the Secretary shall object to a
notification of permit to drill if the activity
described in such notification of permit to
drill is likely to affect properties listed, or
eligible for listing, in the National Register
of Historic Places under section 306108 of
title 54, United States Code (commonly known as
the National Historic Preservation Act of
1966).
(B) Withdrawal of objection.--The Secretary
may withdraw an objection under subparagraph
(A) if the operator consults with the Secretary
on such objection and places conditions on the
notification of permit to drill sufficient to
comply with section 306108 of title 54, United
States Code (commonly known as the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966).
(d) Objection or No Action.--
(1) Notification of incomplete notification.--Not
later than 15 days after receipt of a notification of
permit to drill, or a revised notification of permit to
drill, from an operator under this section, the
Secretary shall notify the operator in writing if the
notification of permit to drill is not complete.
(2) Notification of objections.--Not later than 45
days after receipt of a complete notification of permit
to drill from an operator under this section, the
Secretary shall review the notification of permit to
drill and--
(A) notify the operator in writing of any
objections to the notification of permit to
drill; or
(B) take no action.
(3) No action required.--If the Secretary has not
notified an operator under either paragraph (1) or
paragraph (2) within 45 days after receipt of a
notification of permit to drill from the operator under
this section, the operator may, without further action
from the Secretary, conduct the drilling and production
activities for which the notification of permit to
drill was submitted.
(4) Opportunity to resubmit notification.--If the
Secretary notifies an operator under paragraph (1) of
an incomplete notification or paragraph (2) of an
objection, the Secretary shall allow the operator to
address such incomplete notification or objection and
revise and resubmit the notification of permit to
drill.
(5) Opportunity to resubmit notification as apd.--If
the Secretary notifies an operator under paragraph (2)
of an objection, the Secretary shall allow the operator
to resubmit such information in the form of an APD.
(e) Notification Fee.--The Secretary may not charge an
operator under this section a fee for submitting a notification
of permit to drill greater than the fee the Secretary charges
an applicant for an APD.
(f) Environmental Review.--
(1) In general.--An environmental review or
archeological review described in subsection (c)(1)(B)
may be completed by a third-party contractor approved
by the Secretary or pursuant to a memorandum of
understanding between the operator and the Secretary.
(2) Field work authorization.--The Secretary shall
issue a field work authorization to a third-party
contractor for the purposes of paragraph (1) within a
reasonable time.
(3) Request for concurrence.--The Secretary shall
allow a third-party contractor to submit a request to
the State Historic Preservation Office on behalf of the
Secretary.
(g) Additional Surface Use Permits.--The Secretary may not
require an operator that has submitted a notification of permit
to drill for which the Secretary did not object to obtain a
surface use permit for an action included in the notification
of permit to drill.
(h) Site Inspection.--The Secretary may not require an
operator that has submitted a notification of permit to drill
for which the Secretary did not object to submit to a site
inspection before commencement of the activities described in
the notification of permit to drill.
(i) Federal Enforcement.--The Secretary may conduct
inspections of and evaluate activities described in a
notification of permit to drill for purposes of bringing an
enforcement action. The Secretary may suspend enforcement
proceedings if the operator modifies its activities to comply
with the notification of permit to drill or obtains an APD for
such activities.
(j) Application of NEPA.--
(1) No action by secretary.--The decision by the
Secretary to take no action under subsection
(c)(1)(B)(2) shall not constitute a major Federal
action under section 102(2)(C) of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C.
4332(2)(C)).
(2) Development of regulations.--The development of
any regulation pursuant to this section shall
constitute a major Federal action under section
102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)).
(k) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) APD.--The term ``APD'' means an application to
drill or re-enter a well.
(2) Available federal land.--The term ``available
Federal land'' means Federal land that--
(A) is located within the boundaries of a
State;
(B) is not held by the United States in trust
for the benefit of a federally recognized
Indian Tribe;
(C) is not a unit of the National Park
System;
(D) is not a unit of the National Wildlife
Refuge System;
(E) is not a Congressionally-approved
wilderness area under the Wilderness Act (16
U.S.C. 1131 et seq.); and
(F) is managed by the Director of the Bureau
of Land Management or the Chief of the U.S.
Forest Service.
(3) Drilling operations.--The term ``drilling
operations'' means the drilling or re-entry of a well.
(4) Drilling plan.--The term ``drilling plan'' means
a plan containing--
(A) a description of the drilling program;
(B) the surface and projected completion zone
location;
(C) pertinent geologic data;
(D) expected hazards;
(E) proposed mitigation measures to address
such hazards;
(F) any other information specified in
applicable notices or orders; and
(G) any other pertinent data as the Secretary
may require.
(5) Surface use plan of operation.--The term
``surface use plan of operation'' means a plan
containing--
(A) the road and drill pad location;
(B) details of pad construction;
(C) methods for containment and disposal of
waste material;
(D) plans for reclamation of the surface;
(E) any other information specified in
applicable orders or notices; and
(F) any other pertinent data as the Secretary
may require.
SEC. [44.] 45. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Mineral Leasing Act''.
DISSENTING VIEWS
H.R. 6088 is another in a series of Republican bills
designed to make drilling for oil and gas on public land easier
and cheaper for large corporations by weakening protections for
our air, water, and land, and keeping the public in the dark.
Despite the repeated inaccurate claims from the Majority,
oil and gas companies have had no problems receiving drilling
permits from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Companies
hold over 7,200 approved permits that they have not used, the
number of permits waiting to be reviewed is lower than at any
point in the previous twelve years, and BLM's new permit
processing system has brought the review time for drilling
permits to under 60 days. For the Majority, it seems, this is
not fast enough.
This bill would attempt to speed permit processing by
eliminating the need for BLM to process most permits at all,
replacing that review with a vague notification system that
would allow companies to avoid public and environmental
scrutiny of their drilling plans. While the Secretary has the
authority to object to these new ``Notifications for Permits to
Drill'' (NPD) within 45 days, the bill is designed to tie the
Secretary of the Interior's hands and forbid such objections in
nearly all cases.
First, the bill lays out five very broad drilling
situations in which objections would be forbidden, including up
to 150 acres of new well pads in entirely undeveloped regions
as long as oil and gas drilling was considered to be a
reasonably foreseeable activity in a land use plan approved in
the last 10 years. Land use plans cover huge areas, typically
millions of acres, and reasonably foreseeable development
scenarios look at potential region-wide impacts, not specific
impacts where wells will actually be drilled or roads will
actually be built. The fact that NPDs would be allowed for new
well pads of up to 10 acres provides incentives for companies
to use multiple smaller pads instead of one potentially larger
pad, greatly increasing the potential impacts on the surface.
Second, even if the NPD does not fall under one of those
five situations, the Secretary would be unable to object if the
operator submits an ``environmental review'' and an
``archeological review,'' but there are no standards in the
bill for what those reviews must include.
In all of these cases, there is no requirement that the
public be informed about the drilling plans, nor any way for
the public to comment on them. There is also no way for the BLM
to meet its obligation to manage the land for multiple uses,
meaning that hiking, fishing, camping, grazing, recreation,
conservation, and other uses of public land will all be at the
mercy of oil and gas companies seeking to drill.
The only amendment adopted at markup, offered by Chairman
Bishop, made the bill worse by removing the ability for the
Secretary to require additional information from drilling
companies. Democratic amendments to require additional
information on the impact of the bill, tariffs, and oil exports
on gas prices, as well as potential conflicts of interest
between companies and the Secretary, were defeated by the
Majority.
H.R. 6088 will do nothing to help American consumers, but
will allow oil and gas companies operating on public land to
avoid public scrutiny and environmental protection
requirements. This legislation seems to be based on the adage
that it is easier to seek forgiveness than to ask permission.
Unfortunately, the permanent alteration of pristine landscapes,
or the lasting damage from spills and blowouts in fragile
areas, cannot be forgiven. For those reasons and more, we
strongly oppose this legislation.
Raul M. Grijalva,
Ranking Member, Committee on
Natural Resources.
Nydia M. Velazquez.
A. Donald McEachin.
[all]