19–006 

112TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 112–615 

CONGRESSIONAL REPLACEMENT OF PRESIDENT OBAMA’S 

ENERGY-RESTRICTING AND JOB-LIMITING OFFSHORE 

DRILLING PLAN 

JULY 20, 2012.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington, from the Committee on Natural 

Resources, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

DISSENTING VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 6082] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred the 

bill (H.R. 6082) to officially replace, within the 60-day Congressional review period under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, 

President Obama’s Proposed Final Outer Continental Shelf Oil & 

Gas Leasing Program (2012–2017) with a congressional plan that 

will conduct additional oil and natural gas lease sales to promote 

offshore energy development, job creation, and increased domestic 

energy production to ensure a more secure energy future in the 

United States, 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 ‘‘Congressional Replacement of President Obama’s 

Energy-Restricting and Job-Limiting Offshore Drilling Plan’’. 

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

In this Act: 

(1) OCS PLANNING AREA.—Any reference to an ‘‘OCS Planning Area’’ means 

such Outer Continental Shelf Planning Area as specified by the Department of 

the Interior as of January 1, 2012. 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
2 

(2) PROPOSED OIL AND GAS LEASING PROGRAM (2012–2017).—The term ‘‘Proposed 

Final Outer Continental Shelf Oil & Gas Leasing Program (2012–2017)’’ means 

such plan as transmitted to the Speaker of the House and President of the Senate on June 28, 2012. 

SEC. 3. REQUIREMENT TO IMPLEMENT PROPOSED OIL AND GAS LEASING PROGRAM (2012– 

2017). 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Except as otherwise provided in this Act, the Secretary of the 

Interior shall implement the Proposed Final Outer Continental Shelf Oil & Gas 

Leasing Program (2012–2017) in accordance with the schedule for conducting oil 

and gas lease sales set forth in such proposed program, the Outer Continental Shelf 

Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.), and otherwise applicable law. 

(b) MODIFIED AND ADDITIONAL LEASE SALES.—Notwithstanding the schedule of 

lease sales in the Proposed Final Outer Continental Shelf Oil & Gas Leasing Program (2012–2017), the Secretary shall conduct under the Outer Continental Shelf 

Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.) oil and gas lease sales in OCS Planning Areas 

as specified in the following table, in the year specified in the table for each lease 

sale: 

Lease Sale No. OCS Planning Area Year 

229 Western Gulf of Mexico .............. 2012 

220 Mid-Atlantic ................................ 2013 

225 Eastern Gulf of Mexico ............... 2013 

227 Central Gulf of Mexico ............... 2013 

249 Southern California (existing infrastructure sale) ..................... 2013 

233 Western Gulf of Mexico .............. 2013 

244 Cook Inlet .................................... 2013 

212 Chukchi Sea ................................ 2013 

228 Southern California .................... 2014 

230 Mid-Atlantic ................................ 2014 

231 Central Gulf of Mexico ............... 2014 

238 Western Gulf of Mexico .............. 2014 

242 Beaufort Sea ................................ 2014 

221 Chukchi Sea ................................ 2014 

245 Mid-Atlantic ................................ 2015 

232 North Atlantic ............................. 2015 

234 Eastern Gulf of Mexico ............... 2015 

235 Central Gulf of Mexico ............... 2015 

246 Western Gulf of Mexico .............. 2015 

237 Chukchi Sea ................................ 2016 

239 North Aleutian Basin ................. 2016 

248 Western Gulf of Mexico .............. 2016 

241 Central Gulf of Mexico ............... 2016 

226 Eastern Gulf of Mexico ............... 2016 

217 Beaufort Sea ................................ 2016 

243 Southern California .................... 2017 

250 Mid-Atlantic ................................ 2017 

247 Central Gulf of Mexico ............... 2017 

255 South Atlantic-South Carolina .. 2015 

(c) LEASE SALES DESCRIBED.—For purposes of subsection (b)— 

(1) lease sale numbers 229, 227, 233, 244, 225, 231, 238, 235, 242, 246, 226, 

241, 237, 248, and 247 are such sales proposed in, and shall be conducted in 

accordance with, the Proposed Final Outer Continental Shelf Oil & Gas Leasing 

Program (2012–2017), except each such lease sale shall be conducted in the year 

specified for such sale in the table in subsection (b); 

(2) lease sale numbers 220, 212, 228, 230, 221, 245, 232, 234, 239, 217, and 

243 are such sales proposed in, and shall be conducted in accordance with, the 

Draft Proposed Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Oil and Gas Leasing Program for 

2010–2015 as published in Federal Register on January 21, 2009 (74 Fed. Reg. 

12), except each such lease sale shall be conducted in the year specified for such 

sale in the table in subsection (b); and 

(3) lease sale numbers 249 and 250 shall be conducted— 

(A) for lease tracts in the Southern California OCS Planning Area and 

Mid-Atlantic OCS Planning Area, respectively, as determined by and at the 

discretion of the Secretary, subject to subparagraph (C); 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
3 

(B) in the year specified for each such lease sale in the table in subsection 

(b); and 

(C) in accordance with the other provisions of this Act. 

SEC. 4. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE LEASE SALE. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—In lease sale 249 under section 3, the Secretary shall offer for 

sale leases of tracts in the Santa Maria and Santa Barbara/Ventura Basins of the 

Southern California OCS Planning Area as soon as practicable, but not later than 

December 31, 2013. 

(b) USE OF EXISTING STRUCTURES OR ONSHORE-BASED DRILLING.—The Secretary 

of the Interior shall include in leases offered for sale under lease sale 249 such 

terms and conditions as are necessary to require that development and production 

may occur only from offshore infrastructure in existence on the date of the enactment of this Act or from onshore-based drilling. 

SEC. 5. NATIONAL DEFENSE. 

(a) NATIONAL DEFENSE AREAS.—This Act shall in no way affect the existing authority of the Secretary of Defense, with the approval of the President, to designate 

national defense areas on the outer Continental Shelf pursuant to section 12(d) of 

the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1341(d)). 

(b) PROHIBITION ON CONFLICTS WITH MILITARY OPERATIONS.—No person may engage in any exploration, development, or production of oil or natural gas on the 

Outer Continental Shelf under a lease issued under this Act that would conflict with 

any military operation, as determined in accordance with the Memorandum of 

Agreement between the Department of Defense and the Department of the Interior 

on Mutual Concerns on the Outer Continental Shelf signed July 20, 1983, and any 

revision or replacement for that agreement that is agreed to by the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Interior after that date but before the date of 

issuance of the lease under which such exploration, development, or production is 

conducted. 

SEC. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT REQUIREMENT. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—For the purposes of this Act and in order to conduct lease sales 

in accordance with the lease sale schedule established by this Act, the Secretary of 

the Interior shall prepare a multisale environmental impact statement under section 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332) for all 

lease sales required under this Act that are not included in the Proposed Final 

Outer Continental Shelf Oil & Gas Leasing Program (2012–2017). 

(b) ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED.—Notwithstanding section 102 of the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332), in such statement— 

(1) the Secretary is not required to identify nonleasing alternative courses of 

action or to analyze the environmental effects of such alternative courses of action; and 

(2) the Secretary shall only— 

(A) identify a preferred action for leasing and not more than one alternative leasing proposal; and 

(B) analyze the environmental effects and potential mitigation measures 

for such preferred action and such alternative leasing proposal. 

SEC. 7. EASTERN GULF OF MEXICO NOT INCLUDED. 

Nothing in this Act affects restrictions on oil and gas leasing under the Gulf of 

Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006 (title I of division C of Public Law 109–432; 43 

U.S.C. 1331 note). 

SEC. 8. LEASE SALE OFF THE COAST OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 

In determining the areas off the coast of South Carolina to be made available for 

leasing under this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall— 

(1) consult with the Governor and legislature of the State of South Carolina; 

and 

(2) focus on areas considered to have the most geologically promising energy 

resources. 

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of H.R. 6082, as ordered reported, is to officially replace, within the 60-day Congressional review period under the 

Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, President Obama’s Proposed 

Final Outer Continental Shelf Oil & Gas Leasing Program (2012– 

2017) with a congressional plan that will conduct additional oil and 

natural gas lease sales to promote offshore energy development, job 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
4 

creation, and increased domestic energy production to ensure a 

more secure energy future in the United States. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

Under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), every 

five years the Secretary of the Interior is required to prepare, revise and maintain an oil and natural gas leasing plan for developing the Nation’s resources on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). 

The plan must consist of a schedule of proposed lease sales indicating size, timing and location of the leasing activity—all of which 

is supposed to ‘‘best meet national energy needs for the five-year 

period following its approval or reapproval.’’ 

In 2008, as a result of escalating oil and natural gas prices, 

President George W. Bush and the Congress, in a bipartisan fashion, overturned the two decade-long moratoria on new offshore 

drilling on most of the OCS. Prompted by the availability of these 

broad new swaths of OCS acreage that were newly made available 

for leasing, the Department of the Interior moved in August of 

2008 to prepare a new five-year OCS plan for the 2010–2015 period. This proposed plan was published on January 16, 2009. That 

plan opened the Atlantic OCS planning area, very small areas off 

the coast of California with known resources, a small area in Alaska, the Western and Central Gulf of Mexico, and an area in the 

Eastern Gulf of Mexico—12 areas in total (4 areas off Alaska, 3 

areas off the Atlantic coast, 2 areas off the Pacific coast, and 3 

areas in the Gulf of Mexico). 

However, upon assuming office, Secretary of the Interior Ken 

Salazar slowed the new Draft Proposed Plan by extending the comment period for six months. Furthermore, after the Deepwater Horizon event on April 20, 2010, the Department of the Interior officially announced that the plan would be changed from the 2010– 

2015 time period to 2012–2017. 

In November, 2011, Secretary Salazar introduced a Draft Proposed Five-Year Plan for 2012–2017. The Obama Administration 

boasts that the plan ‘‘makes available more than 75 percent of undiscovered technically recoverable oil and gas resources (UTRR) estimated in federal offshore areas.’’ By focusing on unknown or outdated estimates of UTRR rather than focusing on opening new 

areas, the Administration obfuscated the fact that no new areas are 

opened up to new oil and gas leasing under its proposed plan. This 

draft plan was a marked departure from the earlier action to open 

up vast new areas that were no longer under lock and key due to 

the moratoria. 

On June 28, 2012, the Obama Administration presented the Congress with the Proposed Final Outer Continental Shelf Oil & Gas 

Leasing Program for 2012–2017. Its final plan included 15 lease 

sales to be conducted over the next five years in the Gulf of Mexico 

and limited areas off the coast of Alaska. The lease sale schedule 

was nearly identical to their draft plan presented in November 

2011, with the exception of delaying two lease sales in the Arctic— 

Lease Sale 244 in Cook Inlet and Lease Sale 242 in the Beaufort 

Sea—to 2016 and 2017, respectively. 

Of importance is that Section 18 of the OCSLA specifically requires that the plan be presented to Congress before it is considered approved: ‘‘At least sixty days prior to approving a proposed 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
5 

leasing program, the Secretary shall submit it to the President and 

the Congress, together with any comments received.’’ The past several five-year plans have all been presented to Congress with 

enough lead time so that the plan would be approved by July 1 so 

as to be in place prior to the expiration of the preceding plan. For 

instance, the 2007–2012 five-year plan was approved on July 1, 

2007. However, the Obama Administration’s failure to produce the 

2012–2017 five-year program by May 1, 2012, ensured that its plan 

would not be considered approved under current law until after the 

expiration of the 2007–2012 on June 30, 2012. This means that for 

the first time in the history of the program, the United States is 

operating without an Outer Continental Shelf plan in place. 

Because the proposed final plan presented to the Congress by the 

Administration this June failed to include any new leasing areas, 

effectively reinstating a moratorium for the next half decade on 

roughly 85% of the Nation’s 1.71 billion acres of Outer Continental 

Shelf lands, the Committee determined legislative action was necessary. H.R. 6082 replaces the President’s proposed final plan with 

a leasing plan that incorporates all of the proposed 15 lease sales 

on an accelerated schedule, and adds an additional 14 lease sales 

in new areas of the Nation’s Outer Continental Shelf, including in 

the Atlantic and the Pacific. The robust lease sale schedule included in H.R. 6082 is a legislative assertion of the importance of 

offshore energy production in the United States to pave a path towards energy independence as well as increased economic activity 

and job creation on our shores. 

Numerous Oversight Hearings conducted on five year program 

Both the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources as well 

as the full Committee on Natural Resources have conducted a total 

of seven oversight or legislative hearings and markups, reviewing 

and analyzing the proposals in the President’s plan and proposals 

for harnessing more of America’s offshore resources. A list of these 

hearings includes: 

• April 6, 2011—Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources Legislative Hearing on H.R. 1229, H.R. 1230, and H.R. 

1231; 

• April 13, 2011—Full Committee Markup of H.R. 1229, 

H.R. 1230, and H.R. 1231; 

• November 16, 2011—Full Committee Oversight Hearing 

on ‘‘The Future of U.S. Oil and Natural Gas Development on 

Federal Lands and Waters’’ with Secretary of the Interior Ken 

Salazar; 

• November 18, 2011—Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources Legislative Hearing on H.R. 3410, H.R. 3407, 

and H.R. 3409; 

• February 1, 2012—Full Committee Markup of H.R. 3407, 

H.R. 3408, and H.R. 3410; 

• March 8, 2012—Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources Oversight Hearing on ‘‘Effect of the President’s FY 

2013 Budget and Legislative Proposals for the Bureau of Ocean 

Energy Management (BOEM) and Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) on Private Sector Job Creation, Domestic Energy Production, Safety, and Deficit Reduction’’; and 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
6 

• May 9, 2012—Full Committee Oversight Hearing on ‘‘Evaluating President Obama’s Offshore Drilling Plan and Impacts 

on Our Future.’’ 

Fewest submitted lease sales in history of five year program 

On July 16, 2012, the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service (CRS) issued a historical report on the five-year leasing program that included a table depicting the details of each five year 

program going back to the first program in 1980. The table (included below) clearly confirmed that the 2012–2017 lease sale plan 

put forward by the Obama Administration contains the lowest 

number of lease sales in the history of the program. 

OCSLA SECTION 18 SUBMISSIONS TO CONGRESS 1980 THROUGH 2012 

Years Administration Congress # of Sales 

Listed 

# of Sales 

Held 

Acreage 

(millions) 

1980–1982 1 .......... Carter ................................................................ 96th 36 12 4.1 

1982–1987 ............ Reagan .............................................................. 97th 40 23 19.4 

1987–1992 ............ Reagan .............................................................. 100th 24 17 24.7 

1992–1997 ............ George H.W. Bush ............................................. 102nd 18 12 26.8 

1997–2002 ............ Clinton .............................................................. 105th 16 12 18.8 

2002–2007 ............ George W. Bush ................................................ 107th 20 15 24.3 

2007–2012 ............ George W. Bush ................................................ 110th 212 11 20.53

2012–2017 ............ Obama .............................................................. 112th 15 NA NA 

1 This program was originally referred to as the Comprehensive Program 1980–1985. It was later renamed the Comprehensive Program 

1980–1982 due mainly to judicial activity. California v. Watt, 688F. 2d 1290 (D.C. Cir. 1981). 2 Revised to 16. 

3 As of 2011. 

Source: CRS. Data reflecting approximate acreage leased from one lease sale (Central Gulf of Mexico Sale 216/222 held on June 20, 2012) 

is not yet available. ‘‘NA’’ indicates Not Applicable. 

Resuming cancelled and postponed lease sales 

Some of the lease sales in H.R. 6082 are sales that had been previously planned but cancelled by the Obama Administration. Lease 

Sale 220 off the coast of Virginia serves as one example of a lease 

sale that had been scheduled to be conducted in 2011 under the 

Bush 2007–2012 final leasing program; however, the sale was first 

postponed and then cancelled by the Obama Administration, despite the support by the Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Virginia’s General Assembly, and a bipartisan majority of 

Virginia’s Congressional delegation. Other sales included in H.R. 

6082 were included in the previously mentioned draft proposed 

plan for 2010–2015 that was initiated though never finalized. Additional lease sales in lease sale planning areas were included to 

show a dedicated effort to provide regularly scheduled lease sales 

in new areas. 

California lease sales 

H.R. 6082 includes two lease sales in the Southern California 

Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Planning Area. Lease Sale 249 is 

required to be conducted by 2013. The expedited timing of this 

lease sale is a result of the lease sale criteria, which requires the 

Secretary to conduct a lease sale comprised only of lease blocks 

that allow industry to utilize existing infrastructure already in 

place. This sale conforms to applications already underway in California where a company is looking to drill in California State 

waters from a platform in federal waters. The State of California 

has been helping the company move permits through the State and 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
7 

federal process. The Committee believes that can serve as a model 

for the special lease sale in California waters. In developing this 

sale, the Committee consulted with a group of California petroleum 

geologists who estimate that there are 1.6 billion barrels of oil on 

unleased acreage that could be reached with extended reach drilling without a single new platform off the California coast. Lease 

Sale 243 in Southern California is scheduled for much later in the 

plan 2017 to provide sufficient time for planning. 

Eastern Gulf of Mexico 

H.R. 6082 specifically includes a section to make very clear the 

fact that the bill does not in any way repeal the moratorium on oil 

and natural gas leasing through 2022 in specific sections of the 

Eastern Gulf of Mexico, as is currently law under the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006 (GOMESA, Public Law 109–432). 

However, there is a very small amount of acreage in the Eastern 

Gulf of Mexico that is not under the GOMESA moratorium, and 

therefore is open and available for leasing. As a result, H.R. 6082 

includes three lease sales for this very small open area, which borders the Central Gulf of Mexico planning area, two of which reflect 

lease sales included in President Obama’s proposed final plan presented to Congress on June 28, 2012, and an additional sale in the 

same area. 

Protection for Defense operations 

Currently, in conducting lease sales in the OCS, the Secretary of 

the Interior works within a mutually-agreed to framework that was 

developed between the Department of the Interior and the Department of Defense under a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) signed 

by both Secretaries in 1983. This Act requires the Secretaries to 

continue to work inside that framework established by the Memorandum of Agreement or any update of that agreement that follows. 

Public lands of the United States are entrusted to the care of the 

federal government to ensure for their multiple-use by a wide variety of interests. In the case of federal OCS waters, the MOA allows 

for a symbiotic relationship between the Department of Defense 

and the Department of the Interior. The MOA ensures that the 

Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Defense are on equal 

footing in the leasing process and the two parties created a framework that balances those needs. The MOA clearly recognizes that 

the OCS leasing program of the Department of the Interior is an 

‘‘integral part of the nation’s energy security program,’’ but it also 

recognizes that the military’s continued use of the OCS is imperative to ensure that our armed forces ‘‘achieve and maintain an optimum state of readiness.’’ The Committee believes that the MOA 

has successfully managed the multiple-use of federal lands. 

Given the success of this MOA, the Committee also recognizes 

that the best way to feasibly ensure that the joint goals of preserving access to the OCS for the U.S. armed forces and for mineral development is to allow the departments to continue their negotiations inside the framework of the MOA. The Committee believes that a scenario where one department is given precedence 

over the other could fundamentally undermine the multiple-use 

mission for public lands. Instead, the MOA is recognized as a deliVerDate Mar 15 2010 03:49 Jul 21, 2012 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR615.XXX HR615

pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
8 

cate, yet sound, means by which both departments may reach mutually acceptable solutions, thereby allowing leasing to continue in 

the OCS while making certain that the needs of our Nation’s 

armed forces are continued to be met. 

Energy companies and state sponsors of terrorism 

The Committee has been increasingly concerned that some foreign multinational energy companies and/or their subsidiaries that 

are currently operating on the Nation’s OCS area are engaged in 

business operations with nations that are designated as State 

Sponsors of Terrorism by the U.S. Department of State. While this 

bill does not change existing laws that limit economic activity with 

state sponsors of terrorism, the Committee remains concerned that 

companies are increasingly choosing to operate in these countries, 

counter to U.S. national security interests. 

The Committee expects the Administration to do a better job of 

tracking and identifying those companies that currently operate in 

the United States and have subsidiaries that are known to have 

operations in conjunction with State Sponsors of Terrorism. The 

Committee requests that the Administration report those findings 

back to the Committee. Furthermore, the report to the Committee 

should review current laws and regulations available to the Administration to review operations by any companies operating in the 

United States OCS that may be somehow linked through business 

operations with State Sponsors of Terrorism as well as possible actions that may be taken should these companies insist on continuing to collaborate with State Sponsors of Terrorism. 

COMMITTEE ACTION

H.R. 6082 was introduced on July 9, 2012, by Congressman Doc 

Hastings (R–WA) and referred to the House Committee on Natural 

Resources. On July 17, 2012, the Full Resources Committee met to 

consider the bill. Congressman Jeff Duncan (R–TN) offered amendment designated #1 to the bill; the amendment was adopted by 

voice vote. Congressman Jon Runyan (R–NJ) offered amendment 

designated .050 to the bill; the amendment was defeated by voice 

vote. Congressman Paul Tonko (D–NJ) offered amendment designated .003 to the bill; the amendment was not adopted by a bipartisan roll call vote of 13 to 20, as follows: 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
9 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 10 HR615.001
10 

Congressman Rush Holt (D–NJ) offered amendment designated 

.005 to the bill; the amendment was not adopted by a roll call vote 

of 15 to 19, as follows: 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
11 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 12 HR615.002
12 

Congressman Rush Holt (D–NJ) offered amendment designated 

.006 to the bill; the amendment was not adopted by a roll call vote 

of 16 to 21, as follows: 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
13 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 14 HR615.003
14 

Congressman Edward Markey (D–MA) offered amendment designated .002 to the bill; the amendment was not adopted by a bipartisan roll call vote of 15 to 25, as follows: 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
15 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 16 HR615.004
16 

Congressman Edward Markey (D–MA) offered amendment designated .004 to the bill; the amendment was not adopted by a bipartisan roll call vote of 17 to 25, as follows: 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
17 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 18 HR615.005
18 

Congressman Frank Pallone (D–NJ) offered amendment designated .059 to the bill; the amendment was not adopted by a bipartisan roll call vote of 16 to 26, as follows: 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
19 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 20 HR615.006
20 

The bill, as amended, was then adopted and ordered favorably 

reported to the House of Representatives by a bipartisan roll call 

vote of 24 to 17, as follows: 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
21 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 22 HR615.007
22 

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

1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of 

the House of Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the Committee of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out this bill. However, clause 3(d)(2)(B) of that rule provides 

that this requirement does not apply when the Committee has included in its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the bill prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. Under clause 

3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 

section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has received the following cost estimate for this bill from the 

Director of the Congressional Budget Office: 

H.R. 6082—Congressional Replacement of President Obama’s Energy-Restricting and Job-Limiting Offshore Drilling Plan 

Summary: H.R. 6082 would establish a schedule for oil and gas 

lease sales in the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) that would replace the leasing plan developed by the Department of the Interior 

(DOI) for the 2012–2017 period. The bill would direct DOI to auction leases in areas that are not included in DOI’s plan, including 

the OCS in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and the North Aleutian 

Basin in Alaska. It also would require auctions to be held earlier 

and more frequently in certain OCS areas in Alaska and the eastern Gulf of Mexico. Under H.R. 6082, the timetable for sales in the 

central and western Gulf of Mexico, which occur annually under 

current policies, would remain unchanged. 

CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 6082 would increase offsetting 

receipts collected from lease sales over the 2013–2022 period, thus 

reducing net direct spending by about $600 million over that period. In addition, CBO estimates that implementing the bill would 

cost $35 million over the 2013–2017 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts. Enacting this bill would not affect 

revenues. Pay-as-you-go procedures apply because enacting the legislation would affect offsetting receipts (a credit against direct 

spending). 

H.R. 6082 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 6082 is shown in the following table. The costs 

of this legislation fall within budget functions 300 (natural resources and the environment) and 950 (undistributed offsetting receipts). 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
23 

1The geographic scope of OCS leasing has changed often over the past few decades. See Adam 

Vann, Offshore Oil and Gas Development: Legal Framework, CRS Report for Congress RL33404 

(Congressional Research Service, May 2, 2011); and Curry L. Hagerty, Outer Continental Shelf 

Moratoria on Oil and Gas Development, CRS Report for Congress R41132 (Congressional Research Service, March 23, 2011). 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2013– 

2017 

CHANGES IN DIRECT SPENDING 1

Estimated Budget Authority ......................................................... 0 0 ¥150 ¥135 ¥235 ¥520 

Estimated Outlays ........................................................................ 0 0 ¥150 ¥135 ¥235 ¥520 

CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION 

Estimated Authorization Level ...................................................... 15 15 2 2 1 35 

Estimated Outlays ........................................................................ 13 15 4 2 1 35 

1 Over the 2013–2022 period, CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 6082 would reduce net direct spending by $600 million. 

Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that H.R. 

6082 will be enacted near the end of 2012 and that the amounts 

necessary to implement the bill will be appropriated each year. Because oil and gas production usually occurs several years after a 

lease is issued, CBO expects that most of the net increase in offsetting receipts under H.R. 6082 over the next 10 years would result 

from bonus payments collected when firms acquire leases. 

Direct spending 

H.R. 6082 would codify an OCS leasing schedule for the 2013– 

2017 period that includes auctions in areas that would not be 

leased under DOI’s current five-year plan. CBO estimates that 

those additional sales would increase net offsetting receipts, a credit against direct spending, by about $600 million over the 2013– 

2022 period relative to the amounts we expect the government to 

collect from OCS leasing under current law. That estimate is based 

on information from DOI about the oil and gas resources in the affected regions, historical rates of leasing in those areas, and recent 

trends in the amount of bonus bids paid for other OCS leases. Although H.R. 6082 would direct DOI to hold certain lease sales 

starting in 2013, CBO anticipates that most of the additional proceeds would be collected after 2015 because of the time needed to 

complete geological, environmental, and other assessments for each 

sale and to issue leases to winning bidders. 

Leasing in the Atlantic and Pacific OCS. With the exception of 

certain areas off the coast of Florida, which are subject to a temporary ban on leasing until July 1, 2022, decisions about where and 

when to offer OCS leases are made administratively—in consultation with industry and affected states—for five-year periods. Leases 

cannot be offered for areas that are not included in a five-year 

plan, but the available regions may change whenever a new plan 

is adopted. Based on DOI’s plan for 2013 through 2017, CBO assumes that no leasing will occur in the Atlantic or Pacific OCS over 

that period. However, CBO’s baseline projections of oil and gas 

leasing receipts reflect the possibility that DOI will offer leases in 

those areas after 2017.1 CBO assumes that enacting H.R. 6082 

would have no effect on OCS leasing policies after 2017 because the 

stipulations in the bill would apply only to auctions held during the 

2013–2017 period. 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
24 

2The Energy Information Administration estimates that no oil or gas will be produced in the 

Atlantic OCS through 2035 under the price and resource assumptions in the agency’s reference 

case for 2012. See Annual Energy Outlook 2012, DOE/EIA–0383 (2012) (June 2012), tables 132 

and 133. Those projections assume that leasing in the Atlantic OCS will begin in 2018. See Annual Energy Outlook 2011, DOE/EIA–0383 (2011) (April 2011), pp. 35–37. 

Estimates of potential proceeds from leasing in areas of the Atlantic and Pacific OCS are uncertain. Because there has been no 

leasing activity in those areas for more than 25 years, there are no 

data on bidders’ assessments of the value of those resources relative to alternative investments in domestic resources onshore, 

other OCS regions, or international prospects. Areas that primarily 

contain natural gas may not attract significant industry interest if 

prices remain near their current levels.2 Other factors that could 

affect bidder interest include the absence of pipelines and onshore 

processing facilities in key areas and past litigation regarding offshore oil and gas development, which resulted in the cancellation 

of some federal leases in both regions. In addition, some resources 

in those regions probably would be excluded from auctions because 

leasing may not be compatible with state coastal zone management 

plans. 

Based on such considerations and DOI’s resource assessments, 

CBO estimates that conducting auctions in the Atlantic and Pacific 

OCS as specified by this bill would increase net proceeds from oil 

and gas leasing by $550 million over the 2013–2022 period relative 

to the amounts expected under current law. Based on historical 

trends, CBO estimates that the additional bonus payments would 

be collected by 2018. The change in receipts for the remainder of 

the 10-year period would be limited to rental payments on nonproducing leases and royalties on any leases brought into production 

within that period. 

Although the timing of auctions in the Atlantic and Pacific after 

2017 under current law is unknown, CBO expects that leasing will 

occur at some point in the future without any change in law. Thus, 

legislation to require immediate leasing of those areas would accelerate development but probably not affect the total amount of development in those areas over the next several decades. 

Leasing in the Alaska OCS. The leasing schedule in H.R. 6082 

would include an auction in the North Aleutian Basin in Alaska in 

2016. That OCS region is not included in DOI’s leasing plan for the 

2013–2017 period. Estimates of bidder valuations and interest in 

such leases are uncertain because the firms that won leases in this 

region in the 1980s relinquished them as a result of litigation. For 

this estimate, CBO anticipates that bonus bids could range from a 

few million dollars to about $100 million, which would be roughly 

proportionate to the prices recently paid for resources leased in the 

Chukchi Sea. CBO estimates that proceeds from enacting this provision would fall in the midpoint of this range—or about $50 million. 

Leasing in Areas Where Leasing Will Occur Under the Current 

Five-Year Plan. H.R. 6082 would change the timing and frequency 

of auctions in some areas that are included in DOI’s current fiveyear plan, such as the Chukchi Sea, Beaufort Sea, and Cook Inlet 

in Alaska and part of the eastern Gulf of Mexico. For example, the 

bill would direct DOI to auction leases in the Chukchi Sea three 

times during the 2013–2017 period, compared to the single sale 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
25 

planned by DOI. CBO estimates that those stipulations would 

change the years in which receipts are collected but would have no 

significant net effect on the amount of receipts over the 2013–2022 

period. 

Although DOI makes areas available for oil and gas development, the quantity of acreage leased and the prices paid for those 

leases depend on decisions made by firms. Industry valuations typically reflect information from seismic analysis and from exploration 

and development activities on other leases. Because such activities 

typically take several years to complete, CBO expects that the information available to bidders for valuing leases would be roughly 

the same whether leases are auctioned on a single or multiple occasions within that five-year period. 

Spending Subject to Appropriation 

Based on spending patterns for similar activities, CBO estimates that DOI would spend about $35 million over the 2013–2017 period 

to complete pre-auction assessments and conduct the additional 

lease sales required by the bill, assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts. 

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. 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
26 

CBO ESTIMATE OF PAY-AS-YOU-GO EFFECTS FOR H.R. 6082, AS ORDERED REPORTED BY THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES ON JULY 18, 2012 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars 

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2012– 2017 2012–2022 

NET INCREASE OR DECREASE (¥) DEFICIT 

Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Impact ................................................................................................... 0 0 0 ¥150 ¥135 ¥235 ¥60 ¥5 ¥5 ¥5 ¥5 ¥520 ¥600 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
27 

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 6082 contains 

no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. 

Previous CBO estimates: CBO has prepared cost estimates for 

two pieces of legislation that are similar to H.R. 6082. On May 2, 

2011, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 1231, the Reversing President Obama’s Offshore Moratorium Act, as ordered reported by the House Committee on Natural Resources on April 13, 

2011. On February 7, 2012, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for 

H.R. 3410, the Energy Security and Transportation Jobs Act, as ordered reported by the House Committee on Natural Resources on 

February 1, 2012. Differences among the estimates largely reflect 

differences in provisions regarding the eastern Gulf of Mexico, revenue sharing with states, and the time period covered by the legislation: H.R. 6082 would revise leasing policies for the period from 

2013 through 2017; in contrast, the changes in H.R. 1231 and H.R. 

3410 would remain in effect indefinitely. 

Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Kathleen Gramp; Impact on 

state, local, and tribal governments: Mellissa Merrell; Impact on 

the private sector: Amy Petz. 

Estimate approved by: Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant Director 

for Budget Analysis. 

2. Section 308(a) of Congressional Budget Act. As required by 

clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, 

this bill does not contain any new budget authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in revenues or tax expenditures. 

CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 6082 would increase offsetting 

receipts collected from lease sales over the 2013–2022 period, thus 

reducing net direct spending by about $600 million over that period. In addition, CBO estimates that implementing the bill would 

cost $35 million over the 2013–2017 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts. Enacting this bill would not affect 

revenues. Pay-as-you-go procedures apply because enacting the legislation would affect offsetting receipts (a credit against direct 

spending). 

3. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by 

clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or objective 

of this bill, as ordered reported, is to officially replace, within the 

60–day Congressional review period under the Outer Continental 

Shelf Lands Act, President Obama’s Proposed Final Outer Continental Shelf Oil & Gas Leasing Program (2012–2017) with a congressional plan that will conduct additional oil and natural gas 

lease sales to promote offshore energy development, job creation, 

and increased domestic energy production to ensure a more secure 

energy future in the United States. 

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. 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
28 

PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW

This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or tribal law. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

If enacted, this bill would make no changes in existing law. 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
(29) 

DISSENTING VIEWS 

With the passage of H.R. 6082, over the last 18 months the Natural Resources Committee has now reported out a total of 11 bills 

intended to open up nearly every last piece of our public lands to 

drilling and hand even more giveaways to Big Oil. All in all, the 

Majority has cast a total of 62 votes in the Natural Resources Committee that benefit the oil and gas industry. 

The Majority has voted repeatedly to allow drilling off our beaches in California, New Jersey and Florida without improving the 

safety of offshore drilling. They have voted to allow drilling in the 

crown jewel of our wildlife refuge system, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. They have voted to turn over nearly all of 

our public lands onshore to the oil industry within a few short 

years. They have repeatedly voted against putting in place any new 

safety standards for offshore drilling following the BP spill, against 

ensuring that oil companies making record profits are paying their 

fair share to drill on public lands, and against keeping the oil and 

gas produced from public lands here in America to benefit American consumers. 

We oppose H.R. 6082 because it continues that trend, forcing 

drilling off the East Coast, stretching from Maine to South Carolina, off of Southern California and in the important fishery of 

Bristol Bay off Alaska while preventing proper environmental review. This legislation would also dangerously rush additional leasing offshore in the Arctic. 

H.R. 6082 would revive a number of long-dead lease sales proposed by the Bush Administration just 4 days before leaving office. 

In the same week that the House will consider Republican legislation to prohibit ‘‘midnight’’ regulations, we will also consider a Republican bill to legislatively reinstate the Bush Administration 

‘‘midnight’’ offshore leasing plan. 

And the legislation would prevent proper environmental review 

of offshore drilling in the Atlantic, Pacific and Bristol Bay by requiring that the Department conduct a single Multisale Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for these areas. Such EIS documents are usually done for lease sales in areas like the Gulf of 

Mexico, where the conditions are well known and similar. However, 

under this proposal, the Department would be forced to conduct a 

single environmental review for these three distinct and wildly different areas. In fact, it would be almost difficult to imagine three 

more different environments. 

Ultimately, H.R. 6082 ignores the fact that President Obama’s 

offshore drilling plan already makes more than 75 percent of the 

offshore oil and gas resources available for drilling. It ignores the 

fact that domestic oil production is at an 18 year high. It ignores 

the fact that we have fifty percent more floating drilling rigs operating in the Gulf of Mexico than we did prior to the BP spill and 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
30 

have more total rigs operating in the United States than does the 

rest of the world combined. And the bill fails to address safety reforms for offshore drilling nor does it ensure that oil companies are 

paying their fair share to drill on public lands. 

The Majority rejected an amendment from Representative Tonko 

(D–NY) that would have required oil companies seeking new leases 

on public land to disclose to the public secret campaign contributions over the preceding five years. The Majority rejected an 

amendment from Energy and Mineral Resources Subcommittee 

Ranking Member Holt (D–NJ) that would have improved the safety 

of offshore drilling, ended the roughly $1 billion in free drilling by 

oil companies in the Gulf of Mexico each year, required oil companies to begin drilling on the 26 million acres they already have 

under lease offshore that hold nearly 18 billion barrels of oil, and 

struck provisions in the underlying bill limiting environmental review of drilling in new areas. 

The Majority also rejected an amendment from Representative 

Holt that would have required oil companies to test all drilling, 

safety and oil spill response equipment in actual Arctic conditions 

prior to drilling there and ensured that drilling in Bristol Bay 

would not harm fishing industry jobs or the economy in Alaska and 

the West Coast. An amendment from Full Committee Ranking 

Member Markey (D–MA) to ensure that all natural gas produced 

from public lands under this act stayed in America to help American consumers and our economy was rebuffed by the Majority. The 

Majority also defeated an amendment from Representative Markey 

that would have required major, integrated oil companies, which 

are making record profits, to relinquish some of the roughly $4 billion the industry receives every year in taxpayer subsidies. Finally, 

the Majority rejected an amendment from Representative Pallone 

(D–NJ) that would have protected New Jersey and the other East 

Coast states by striking the lease sales in the Atlantic. 

Democrats will continue to support President Obama’s ‘‘All of the 

Above’’ energy strategy, which has successfully reduced our dependence on foreign oil from 57 percent during the last year of the 

Bush Administration to 45 percent today and oppose the Majority’s 

continued efforts to hand new giveaways to Big Oil. 

EDWARD J. MARKEY. 

NIKI TSONGAS. 

GRACE F. NAPOLITANO. 

FRANK PALLONE, JR. 

RUSH D. HOLT. 

RAU ́ L M. GRIJALVA. 

PAUL TONKO. 

BEN RAY LUJA ́ N. 

DALE E. KILDEE. 

Æ 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS