[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 87 (Thursday, June 29, 2006)]
[House]
[Pages H4830-H4875]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DEEP OCEAN ENERGY RESOURCES ACT OF 2006
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 897 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 4761.
{time} 1458
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 4761) to provide for exploration, development, and production
activities for mineral resources on the outer Continental Shelf, and
for other purposes, with Mr. Simpson in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the
first time.
The gentleman from California (Mr. Pombo) and the gentleman from West
Virginia (Mr. Rahall) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, we have before us today an extremely important bill.
Earlier in the day we had quite a bit of debate on the rule.
Unfortunately, much of that debate had very little to do with this
bill. Much of that debate had more to do with other issues that
Congress has failed to address over the last several years; but we do
have the opportunity today to move forward in terms of a national
energy policy and taking a step in the right direction.
I look forward to a very active debate, a very insightful debate; and
I hope that my colleagues can actually debate the bill that is in front
of us today because that is what we are debating. I hope that we have
the opportunity to have a full hearing on what is important to this
country.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 1500
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the pending legislation on the
basis that I am unwilling to vote against America's energy
independence. This bill would continue to mortgage our Nation's future
to a handful of multinational oil conglomerates. It demands a continued
addiction to a petroleum diet. It would only further enslave us as a
Nation, as a society, to the oily ways of the past, which do not bode
well for our energy future.
It is telling that the so-called ``energy week'' proclaimed by the
Republican majority consists only of this single piece of legislation
that would only further shackle the Nation to the
[[Page H4831]]
whims and caprices of the petroleum industry. It is telling that this
is their idea, as it has been all along, of what energy independence
means.
As Paul Revere did on that famous midnight ride, those of us opposed
to this ill-conceived bill are raising an alarm. The drumbeat that we
hear pounds out a call of freedom. Freedom to be done with those who
profit and plunder at the gas pumps throughout this country, freedom
from the price gougers, freedom from the merchants of profit and power
over our American values, and the freedom to devise new and alternative
fuels to our petroleum dependency. It is time to stand up and be
counted, to hoist up the flag and salute it, to strike a resounding
chord that will reverberate across this great land of ours.
I say to my colleagues that truly today is Independence Day here in
the House of Representatives, for we are being given an opportunity to
vote against this outrageous bill and vote against it on the following
grounds:
First, it would improperly and perhaps unconstitutionally delegate to
the coastal States virtually all decision-making powers over the
disposition of a Federal resource. It says to all of the other owners
of our offshore water and energy resources, whether they reside in
Ohio, Idaho, Arizona or my great State of West Virginia, so it should
say to the owners of our offshore waters and energy resources, all of
the American taxpayers, no matter what State that they reside in, that
they have no say in this matter. No say whatsoever, that we are going
to vest all of the power with a few, to the detriment of the many.
Second, it would grab the second largest source of income to the
Federal Government after personal income taxes, yank this revenue out
of the Treasury and redistribute it to those few. Let's be clear. This
bill would reallocate existing revenue from OCS oil and gas leases to
willing coastal States, not just future, potential revenue streams, but
also those currently being dedicated to the benefit of the Nation as a
whole.
It would rob the majority of the American people and bankrupt the
Land and Water Conservation Fund so cherished by communities and
localities across this great land. According to the administration,
this is their figures, the revenue-sharing provisions of bill alone
would constitute a $74 billion hit over the first 15 years. Envision
this massive rate on America's resources and what it will mean to the
average American.
Third reason for opposing this bill, it would deprive most of us of
jobs and economic benefits in most of the regions of our country. Those
of you from the Midwest, from the corn belt, you can forget about
ethanol. This bill demands petroleum. Vote for it, and you vote against
your interests. You vote against the jobs in your region and against
economic benefits that the production of ethanol brings to your region.
Those of you from the coalfields, like myself, where we have sought
for many years to broaden our employment base and to reduce our
Nation's petroleum fixation with liquid fuels made from coal, vote for
this and you are voting against the future of your coal miners.
As in the past, these so-called energy bills that come before this
Republican-controlled Congress are nothing but a vote for further, as
the President wants to wean us away from, it is nothing but a vote for
a further addiction to oil.
With the Nation hard and fast on a petroleum diet for decades to come
brought forth by this pending legislation, the widespread
commercialization of coal-to-liquids technology to fuel our vehicles
will continue to be an elusive goal and merely lip service only.
I have never forsaken the coal miners in my congressional district,
and I am not about to do so now.
Fourth, Mr. Chairman, this bill simply is not necessary. Under the
Bush administration alone, the Department of Interior has offered
leases covering 267 million acres of the OCS. Industry has only sought
to acquire 24 million of those acres.
Now, contemplate that for a moment. There are still 243 million acres
available, currently available for leasing that the oil and gas
industry has not yet seen fit to bid upon. In all, in total, over 40
million acres of the OCS are under lease and less than 7 million of
those acres are in production.
Is there a crisis in the OCS? Is there evidence that legislation such
as that before us today, which shreds long-standing moratoria is
needed? The facts tell us not.
Those who bring forth this legislation represent an era that should
now be in our past, seeking to place all of our eggs in a black basket
woven of petroleum. They would defend the predominance of Big Oil,
those with wealth and power over our energy destiny.
Those of us opposed to this legislation bring with us the conviction
that there are limits to what the American people will suffer for the
sake of profit and power. This is indeed a turning point for America.
Mr. Chairman, I urge the defeat of the pending legislation.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman I yield 2 minutes to the majority whip, Mr.
Blunt.
Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman and Mr. Abercrombie for
their work on this bill, which will produce a bipartisan vote today.
I join my friend, Mr. Rahall, in his interest and support in the
continued expansion of the use of coal and ethanol. I just do not think
this bill prevents that from happening. This bill allows us, during a
transitional generation, to help meet the needs of that transition.
This bill allows us to look at domestic resources, at resources close
to our shore that replace those things we are now importing. The U.S.
Minerals Management Service estimates that in these deep sea areas
there are 420 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, almost 20 times the
annual U.S. consumption of natural gas, 86 billion barrels of oil.
Twenty years of imported oil would be 86 billion barrels of oil, or
almost 20 years of imported oil.
This bill is balanced, a common-sense approach that gives the coastal
States unprecedented power to prevent production within 100 miles of
their coastline, while enabling the United States to produce energy in
the deep waters beyond.
This bill is at no cost to the Federal Government. The scoring in the
bill that the sponsors have worked on comes back at no cost in 1 year,
no cost in 2 years, no cost in 10 years. In fact, the Federal
Government brings in additional revenues under this formula, even
though it is beginning to share new revenues with the States.
The U.S. is facing high energy prices. The U.S. is in a crisis of too
much imported oil and natural gas. Too many jobs and gross sales have
gone to other countries as the natural gas prices have made us less
competitive in fertilizer and other industries than we used to be.
This is a great piece of legislation. It is a great effort to bring
so many elements together. I want to again thank the chairman for his
leadership on this legislation and others, along with Mr. Abercrombie,
who have worked so hard to bring it to floor today.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3\1/4\ minutes to the gentlewoman
from California (Mrs. Capps), a true leader in this area who has
devoted a great deal of time on this issue and has a true concern for
our environment and what this issues means for us.
Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague for yielding me time.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in such strong opposition to this budget-busting
bill that threatens our coastal communities. This bill is unnecessary,
misleading and fiscally irresponsible.
The oil and gas companies, awash in profits from high energy prices,
would have you believe these three things: That the offshore oil
resources are off limits today. Second, that this bill will give States
control over the drilling off their coasts. Third, that this bill is
fiscally responsible.
All of it is hogwash.
First, here is a little secret supporters of the bill do not want you
to know. The industry already has access to the vast majority of oil
and gas on the OCS. According to the Bush administration, some 80
percent of the known reserves are located in areas where drilling is
already allowed.
Furthermore, the oil and gas industry already owns the drilling
rights to more than 4,000 untapped leases in the Gulf of Mexico alone.
Why should we
[[Page H4832]]
open the entire U.S. coast to drilling when the industry will not even
drill where it already can?
Second, this bill turns Federal efforts for coastal protection and
public lands protection on its head. The Federal Government sets the
rules on drilling and other activities in Federal waters. The impact on
the environment and the fishing and transportation industries are just
too broad to be determined by a single State.
But this bill turns these important decisions over to the States. It
would be like letting California decide what should go on in Yosemite,
or letting Pennsylvania set the rules for air quality on the east
coast.
And as for the claim that the bill gives a State control of oil
drilling off its coast, that is full of holes, too. The bill ends the
current moratorium on new drilling immediately. In order to continue
even parts of the current ban, a State has to clear numerous hurdles.
It has to petition the Feds through separate legislative votes and
actions by its governor. The petitioning has to be repeated every 5
years.
The Federal Government can simply ignore a State's request for
continuation of the ban anyway, and that is hardly giving a State
control over its coastal protection.
Finally, this bill creates a new permanent entitlement that will add
billions to the Federal deficit.
The Bush administration says the bill would cost $74 billion over the
next 15 years and a whopping $600 billion over the next 60 years. For
my fiscally conservative friends who spent hours trying to strike
$100,000 dollars from appropriations bills, let me repeat that. This
bill will add $74 billion to the deficit over the next 15 years and
$600 billion over the next 60 years.
And for my fiscally conservative Blue Dog friends, this budget-
busting bill will add even more zeroes to those great deficit signs
outside your offices.
I know that Chairman Pombo has spent the last couple of days trying
to bring that cost down. But who really knows what the effect of his
proposed changes are, given the little time anyone actually has had to
digest his manager's amendment?
Mr. Chairman, if Members really want to put brakes on reckless
budgeting, here is the chance to lower the deficit by dollars and not
pennies.
This bill is a bad deal for America. It will unnecessarily put at
risk protections for our coastlines that have been in place for 25
years. It will lead to even more control of our offshore waters by the
oil and gas industry. It will lead to even larger Federal budget
deficits. Vote no on this budget buster.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield for a unanimous consent request to
Mr. Duncan.
Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank and commend Chairman Pombo
for this bill.
(Mr. DUNCAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources
Act. Simply put, the DOER Act is a matter of both out national security
and our economic security. Over the last couple of years gasoline and
natural gas prices have skyrocketed.
More and more people are finding it harder to pay for the gas to fill
up their tanks just so they can get to work to provide for their
families. Lower income citizens are having trouble paying their utility
bills.
We have been blessed with relatively low inflation rates that date
back to the Reagan Administration. However, now in recent months, the
Federal Reserve is constantly rising interest rates due to inflation,
largely caused by rising energy costs.
When businesses have to raise their prices to pay for their energy
bills, those increased costs get passed on to consumers. that is just
simple economics.
At one of our hearings in the Resources Committee we were told that
the United States is the only country in the world that forbids safe
energy production on its Outer Continental shelf. If environmentalists
will not let us drill offshore or in areas within the Country, from
where are we supposed to get our energy? this makes us more vulnerable
to foreign energy producers.
It also drives up prices and hurts poor and lower income and working
people most of all.
We are forced to seek supplies overseas in politically unstable areas
of the world such as the Middle East, Nigeria and Venezuela. Now we are
told that the President of Venezuela wants to work with Castro's Cuba
and the Chinese and drill for energy in Cuban waters that are close to
Florida, so Cuba can drill close to Florida, but we can't.
America has proven oil and gas reserves that we have locked up. We
can no longer afford that luxury. the DOER Act would allow us to
increase the supply of domestic oil and gas and improve the prospects
for a more affordable energy future.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Louisiana (Mr. Jindal), one of the chief authors of the bill.
Mr. JINDAL. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Mr. Pombo for his very good
work on this bill. I would encourage support and a yes vote on this
bill for several reasons.
If you are worried about rising energy prices, I would recommend a
yes vote on this bill. Thirty percent of the Nation's energy comes off
the gulf coast.
If you are interested in treating the gulf coast States equally, the
way that we treat on-shore drilling on Federal lands for inland States,
I would recommend a yes vote on this bill.
If you are interested in our environment, if you are interested in
restoring America's wetlands, I would encourage a yes vote on this
bill.
Louisiana loses 30 miles a year off our coast. We lost 100 miles last
year off our coast thanks to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. We have lost
a size of land equivalent to the entire state of Rhode Island. The
State of Louisiana is poised to pass a constitutional amendment
dedicating 100 percent of the royalties we will receive under this bill
for coastal restoration, hurricane and flood protection, restoring our
coastal infrastructure.
If you are worried about the hundreds of thousands of jobs we are
losing in this country, if you worried about the 100,000 jobs we have
lost in the wood and paper industry in the last 6 years, the 100,000
jobs we have lost in the petrochemical industry in the last 6 years, I
would encourage a yes vote on this bill.
In Louisiana alone, we have lost 5,000 jobs, 5,000 jobs in the last
couple of years, jobs that averaged $50,000 a year, jobs in our
fertilizer industry, jobs in our wood and paper industry, in part
because natural gas prices are half, in Russia are half or less
overseas compared to what we are paying right here in the United
States. If you are worried about keeping those jobs, I would encourage
a yes vote on this bill.
If you are worried about the hurricane damage that occurred in
Louisiana, one of the reasons the entire Louisiana delegation, our
Democrats and Republicans, our Democratic governor, are strongly
encouraging a yes vote for this bill is this is our best chance to get
the recurring revenue sources we need for category 5 levees. This is
the best chance we have for recurring revenue sources to restore our
coasts. Every 2.4 miles of wetlands absorbs 1 foot of tidal surge. I am
going to repeat that. Every 2.4 miles of wetlands absorbs 1 foot of
tidal surge.
We were all shocked, outraged and hopefully sympathetic with the
people of Louisiana after last year's hurricanes. The best way to help
those people is with a yes vote on this bill.
{time} 1515
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield for the purposes of a unanimous
consent request to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gene Green).
(Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the bill
and oppose the amendments.
Mr. Chairman, the price of natural gas is unsustainable for the
American manufacturing base and for American families' home heating. We
are already in a crisis with natural gas around $7 per thousand cubic
feet.
Average long-term contract prices for natural gas have tripled and
quadrupled over the last 5 years, and spot market prices are even
higher.
Normally it would be heresy for a Texan to complain about high
natural gas prices. The fact that I do just that is proof of this
crisis.
The American chemical industry has already lost almost 1 million high
paying jobs due to high natural gas prices. But the worst is yet to
come.
[[Page H4833]]
We are on the verge of a tragedy as the production in the open areas
of the Gulf of Mexico peaks in the next 10 years, and we have nothing
to replace it unless we pass this legislation.
Many of the opponents of oil and gas drilling say drilling will have
no impact on prices. With oil, they have a point, because it is a
global price, but domestic oil does protect us from shortages and price
spikes.
However, natural gas is not easily shipped overseas because it must
be frozen to negative 200 degrees, so it is not a global price.
The high prices we pay for home heating and manufacturing are a
direct result of the fact that our U.S. natural gas is locked up by
federal bans.
Unless we open our offshore areas, the U.S. will experience shortages
of natural gas over the coming winters.
Natural gas is the most efficient, cleanest form of home heating
available and many areas have no alternatives.
We face the very real possibility that one winter, natural gas on the
spot market will not be available at any price--factories will close
and Americans will risk death during the winter.
If that happens, Congress will be to blame, because the United States
is the only developed nation in the world that forbids safe energy
production offshore.
Norway, Britain, Canada, and other highly developed countries with
strong environmental protection produce offshore without problems.
Because they produce their gas, their industries have a competitive
advantage against ours.
Major chemical companies have told me point blank that they are
adding jobs in Europe instead of America, even though they have more
labor and environmental regulations, because they have cheaper natural
gas.
Those are tragic decisions for us, but natural gas is as much as much
as ten times more expensive in the United States than it is overseas.
I support energy alternatives, but ethanol, solar power, and wind
power cannot substitute for natural gas in home heating or for making
plastic.
Electric home heating is much less efficient and natural gas is
needed in manufacturing not just as a fuel, but as a feedstock to
produce plastics.
Much of the materials we use in our daily lives are plastics, and
those materials used to be made in the U.S.
Unless we allow our industries access to domestic natural gas, more
jobs will go to Europe, Russia, China and India in search of natural
gas.
I urge a ``yes'' vote on the bill, and a ``no'' vote on all
amendments to weaken the legislation.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert).
(Mr. BOEHLERT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. BOEHLERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in the strongest possible
opposition to this bill.
First, we should not be opening our coasts, all of our coasts, to oil
drilling when we have not taken the first step, not the first step, to
conserve oil. Drilling today just depletes oil we may need later.
Conserving now means saving more oil year after year after year. But
the Rules Committee did not make in order my amendment on fuel economy
standards, which at least would have allowed us to have a debate on
demand and supply at the same time.
But my opposition goes beyond any general concern about oil drilling
because this bill does far more than simply lift the long-standing
moratoriums on drilling. This bill basically hands over our coastal
waters to the oil interests and makes it hard for States or citizens to
do anything about it.
And this is no exaggeration. The bill makes it difficult for States
to bar drilling. Then, if a State allows drilling, the bill eliminates
fundamental parts of the current process that allow States and citizens
to review drilling plans to make sure they are environmentally sound
and consistent with other possible uses of the waters. Then the bill
blocks any use of the waters that could interfere with drilling. And,
finally, to add a constitutional insult to all that coastal injury, it
enables the Secretary of the Interior to threaten to withhold funding
from States if the Secretary thinks Congress is interfering with oil
drilling. This bill is breathtaking in its overreaching.
Whether you are for or against offshore drilling, you ought to be
against this bill. Once your constituents find out what really is in
it, you will have a lot of explaining to do.
Let me add that the manager's amendment does not do anything to
alleviate my concerns. We studied it to the best of our ability. It was
only available last night at midnight, and we have studied it. The
amendment leaves in place all the unprecedented provisions I just
mentioned. It leaves in place at least one new mandatory spending
program. It even adds a new penalty to coerce States into opening
waters to drilling.
The manager's amendment is also rife with financial gimmickry. It
actually increases the revenues denied the Federal Treasury over the
long haul. It just delays the phase-in of the revenue sharing to
States, but it raises the maximum amount States will get with no
requirement, absolutely none, to report how the money has been used.
So this is not a very good bill. As a matter of fact, it is my
conclusion that it is a bad bill, even with the manager's amendment. It
would make John D. Rockefeller blush.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Rohrabacher).
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this
legislation.
I have represented a southern California coastal district for 18
years. There has never been an oil spill caused by an offshore rig, and
we have had offshore oil drilling off my district for decades. The one
spill we had that polluted our coast came from a tanker.
Those who vote against offshore oil development are basically making
us more dependent on tankers, which are dramatically more likely to
spill oil upon our shores.
As a scuba diver and one of the two active surfers in Congress, I
suggest to those opposing offshore oil development, get real. What you
are advocating will make us more dependent on tankers. Thus, we will
are more likely to have oil spills. Cloaking your positions in
environmental rhetoric does not make it so. You are making us more
likely to have oil spills by making us more dependent on tankers.
Support offshore oil development and a strong, independent American
energy sector.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Pallone), a valued member of our Resources Committee.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this bill.
House Republicans have called this week their so-called ``energy
week,'' but the best they can do is offer up the same tired old refrain
of drill, drill, drill. Unfortunately for them and for the American
people, simply allowing more drilling is going to do virtually nothing
for gasoline or natural gas prices and nothing to move us towards a
sustainable energy future.
Now, proponents of this misguided legislation will accuse those of us
fighting the bill of only saying ``no'' and not having any solution of
our own, but that is a false choice. They are saying that we are either
for drilling or we are for absolutely nothing.
The truth is that many of my colleagues and I have repeatedly offered
solutions to our energy problems, only to have them rebuffed and not
brought to the floor for a vote. Many of these solutions would not be
germane to today's bill but are critical to solving our energy
problems. I am talking about increasing fuel economy standards for our
cars, introducing renewable portfolio standards, and strengthening
energy efficiency standards for buildings and appliances.
I want to say, Mr. Chairman, I am in my district every week talking
about energy efficiency, fuel economy. We just had a school opening,
and we talked about how in Highland Park in my district we have a new
school building that has geothermal fuels, that has new lighting that
has solar power.
Just a week ago, I went to Middlesex County, one of my counties, at
the Rutgers Cooperative Extension Station, and we just showcased new
solar panels. We talked about all the things that can be done to create
more energy efficiency in office buildings and residential buildings.
The State of New Jersey is providing grants that the Federal
Government does not have for residential users to basically provide
more energy efficiency.
So the fact of the matter is the Democrats and those who oppose this
[[Page H4834]]
bill have been out there offering solutions. You just do not let us
bring them up.
The choice that we are making today, whether or not to pass this
bill, also comes with a serious price tag that we have already talked
about. According to the Minerals Management Services' estimates, the
revenue sharing in this bill, along with the giveaways to the oil and
gas companies, would cost taxpayers $74 billion over 15 years, just
increasing the debt. That is what the Republicans do. They increase the
debt.
Now, what is worse is allowing drilling in sensitive offshore areas
with endangered coastal economies in States like New Jersey.
Speakers on the other side have said that they are worried about
jobs. Well, I am worried about jobs in my State. The beach season, the
summer season has begun in my district. When we had problems in the
late 1980s and our beaches were closed for other reasons, we had
billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of jobs that were lost, and
do not tell me that you are not going to have a spill. You say, oh, we
are going to drill for natural gas and we are not going to hit oil.
That is garbage. You have no way of knowing that.
You also make statements about how a State can opt-out. Well, my
State is a small State. How do we opt-out when New York or Virginia
have a spill and it comes to our shores? This is going to devastate our
coastal environment.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from South
Carolina (Mr. Brown).
(Mr. BROWN of South Carolina asked and was given permission to revise
and extend his remarks.)
Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to encourage
my colleagues to support the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006.
I represent over 75 percent of the coastline of South Carolina, which
is some of the most beautiful beaches in the world. I have worked
closely with Chairman Pombo to ensure that the interests of coastal
communities are addressed in this bill.
The revenue share portion of this bill going to coastal communities
will help these communities fund important projects such as beach
renourishment, infrastructure construction and wetlands conservation.
I thank Chairman Pombo and my fellow Resource Committee colleagues,
Congressman Bobby Jindal and Congressman John Peterson, for their hard
work in bringing this bill to the floor today.
I believe that this bill is an important part of the solution to fix
the energy crisis we are all facing today in America. It is also an
important step to stop America's dependency on foreign sources of oil.
Becoming more energy self-sufficient is not only an economic issue but
also an issue of our national security.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. George Miller), the ranking member on the House
Committee on Education and the Workforce.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman
from West Virginia for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, there are many reasons to oppose this legislation. You
can begin with the fiscal reasons. Just last week, we had the
Republicans on the floor pleading for line-item veto so the President
could help them cut deficit spending and cut spending. The President
now says he opposes the spending in this bill, but they are not going
to take that into regard this week. They are going to go ahead and
spend and going to go ahead and increase the deficit. So, apparently,
they just cannot stop themselves from doing that.
But a more important reason is this. It is because of the threat to
the coast that this bill presents and the threat to the coast that is
not necessary. If the rest of the Nation would just follow California,
we banned offshore oil drilling a long time ago, but we also recognized
that we had an obligation as a State to meet our energy needs and not
be as dependent on others as we were at that time. What you now see is
California is the most efficient energy user per capita in the country.
But that is not enough. We are going to go beyond that. The Public
Utilities Commission is putting in a conservation program and energy
efficiency program that will end up being a positive payback for the
consumers. They will save money at the end of the expenditures of about
$2 billion.
We will, in fact, increase the use of biofuels dramatically. The
governor has asked for 180 million gallons of biofuels I think in 2010,
and we are going to meet and exceed that level.
So there are these alternatives that dramatically reduce our
dependence on fossil fuels, and this is really where we ought to be
going.
This is a continuation of a philosophy that has gotten this Nation
into so much trouble, and that is, while we use 25 percent of the
world's fossil fuel resources and we hold 3 percent of the reserve,
that somehow we can drill ourselves out of that problem. It is a
continuation of a policy that was in vogue and popular and maybe even
right-headed in 1950 and 1960, but everything we have learned since
then tells us that we cannot continue in this direction.
So we tried to believe that we could drill our way out of our problem
in Alaska, and now we are going to some of those valuable coastlines
and risking that coastline on the idea that, again, we can continue to
drill our way out of it.
Because the people of this Nation do not want it, this bill has a
perverse set of financial incentives to States and localities to try to
make money talk, as opposed to the people of that State, to try to get
the political establishments to overwhelm the people who have spoken in
the Carolinas and Florida and California and Oregon and Washington and
elsewhere in the country against this policy. So now we are just going
to see if we can bribe them into changing their mind. This is not about
an energy policy. This is about an etiology.
Finally, the other reason to do this is that this legislation drains
money from every other State, money that would be available to the
Federal Government for deficit reduction or for whatever purpose, and
throws it into a couple of States that become the winners of this great
offshore oil lottery.
This House ought to reject it on budget grounds, on environmental
grounds, on energy grounds and on simply a vision of the future.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Louisiana (Mr. Jefferson).
Mr. JEFFERSON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, this bill is not about alternative fuels or about the
environment or about any of the things we are hearing about here today.
It is about the price of natural gas and getting it down in our
country. It is about fairness to the coastal States that are now
providing so much of the resources for this country that are not
getting their fair share of the resources back. It is about inclusion
and including folks in this industry who are not yet included and have
not had the trading to be included or the education to be included.
Right now, natural gas prices are $12.68 per million btu, $4.85 in
China, $1.21 in Iran and 95 cents in Russia. We cannot compete with
those prices. This high natural gas price is devastating our
industries; and, therefore, we are losing jobs across the country in
manufacturing and in the petrochemical industry in my State and around
the country.
Eighty-five percent of the Outer Continental Shelf is off limits for
natural gas production. That is wrong.
Louisiana is America's energy corridor. Approximately 34 percent of
the Nation's natural gas supply and almost 30 percent of the Nation's
crude oil comes through our State. We need to have the right kind of
support to continue providing this help to our country.
{time} 1530
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo).
Ms. ESHOO. I thank my colleague for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in the strongest opposition possible to this
legislation which will erase 25 years of critical environmental
protection. Only a month ago, the House rejected an attempt to lift the
ban on coastal drilling, and yet today we are being told that the
solution to our addiction to oil is more oil; that the oil companies
who are reaping record profits need more relief from Federal
regulation, and that more of our public lands need to be sacrificed for
their bottom lines.
This bill should be entitled Nothing is Sacred Any More. This is an
outrage.
[[Page H4835]]
The wheels have come off here. This bill not only hurts us in terms of
the fiscal condition of the country; it gives the wrong message. It
sends a terrible message to people in States that have spoken out over
and over and over again. Their voices will be ignored. The vote will be
ignored.
The Republican Governor of California is vehemently opposed to this.
This is an insult to local governments, to State governments, and to
anyone that wants to land on the side of the future for our country and
not the past.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Costa).
Mr. COSTA. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I rise to support H.R.
4761. I would also like to thank Chairman Pombo and Ranking Member
Rahall for their efforts on this legislation.
This bill is an important step toward achieving the goal of further
developing our domestic energy resources. We have for too long put vast
oil and natural gas reserves off limits to exploration and production,
as The Washington Post editorial stated this week.
Our domestic reserves are not limitless, and this is a first step.
But we must take other steps, such as increasing conservation,
developing an ethanol industry, and increasing CAFE standards if we are
to make our country safer by cutting our reliance on foreign oil.
Despite the previous efforts of Congresses, our addiction to foreign
oil, as the President stated, is greater today than ever before. That
dependency is a threat to our national security, and we must address
that threat.
I would also like to take this opportunity to commend the efforts of
the author and my friend, Representative Charlie Melancon, on this
legislation. It is clear that Congressmen Jindal and Melancon are
putting the interests of their constituents and the American public
first as opposed to the interests of partisan politics.
Please vote for H.R. 4761. I think it is a step in the right
direction.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Davis), who year after year after year has
been a true leader on this issue and on its environmental effects.
Mr. DAVIS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, today we are debating an issue
that is not just important to the country but it is deeply important to
my home State of Florida: offshore oil drilling.
For the last decade, and I hope and expect for decades to come, the
Florida delegation has stood together to protect Florida on this
critical issue. Why? Because our beaches, our coastline is critical to
who we are as Floridians. It is what brings us to Florida. It is what
keeps us in Florida. It is what brings many of your constituents to
Florida, particularly this time of year. And we do not want to
sacrifice our beaches, our coastline, our environment for oil and gas
drilling that threatens our environment.
Many of the Members of Congress here today from the States that
generate revenue from oil and gas have said this is a debate about
jobs. It is a debate about jobs. Eighty-eight million tourists visited
our State last year. The threat of spilling off the coast of Florida
could be a disaster to our reputation.
Last year, during a tropical storm, not even a hurricane, a tropical
storm off the coast of Louisiana, there was a spill. A spill such as
that off the coast of Florida would be a disaster to our environment,
to our economy. And what is at stake here? Just a few months of natural
gas and oil.
This is not the price Florida should pay. We should be debating here
today raising fuel-efficiency standards, investing in research and
development for the next generation of alternative and renewable
energy. We should not be sacrificing the environment, the economy of
the State of Florida for just a little oil and gas.
This Congress missed a very important opportunity to strike the
balance. I have introduced a bill here in Congress, it is the Permanent
Protection For Florida Act, which would have allowed for oil and gas
drilling safely off the coast of Florida, safely off the coast of the
Panhandle. I went to the Rules Committee and suggested that this bill
be made in order as an amendment. The majority refused.
We need to strike a balance here, a balance between minimizing our
dependency on foreign oil, using the resources we have, but protecting
our resources. Florida's beaches are not just a State resource; they
are a national resource, and they are a national treasure. They are
part of who we are. And we will stand up and protect our environment,
our economy, and our beaches.
Until this Congress strikes the balance, I would urge the rejection
of this bill.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Putnam).
Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Much has been made about the role of Florida in this debate because
Florida has been offered a tremendous opportunity to participate in
this debate as a result of the leadership of Mr. Pombo and Mr. Jindal.
There are things about this bill that give Florida protections she
does not enjoy today. Currently, the entire east coast of Florida is
unprotected. This bill protects it. Currently, the Keys are completely
unprotected. This bill protects them.
There are those who say that 100 miles is too close, who also
cosponsored a bill in 1997 that would have allowed it right at 100
miles. There are those who say that the legislature shouldn't have a
say in what their State does or does not do, who proudly served in the
legislature, many times in leadership positions.
This is not a perfect bill. No bill that ever leaves here and heads
to conference is. But it gives Florida protections she does not now
enjoy. It gives Floridians control over Florida's coasts, where the
chances of Florida having Florida's future in Florida's hands are 100
percent as opposed to what they are in this Congress, where they make
up 25 out of 435.
It gives Floridians concrete proof, written-in-stone protection from
our Department of Defense and the military mission line, thanks to the
leadership of Mr. Young and Mr. Miller working with the committee to
insert into this bill, along with Mr. Boyd, the definition of that
military mission line, which now further aligns this House bill with
our two Florida Senators' proposal.
This is a huge step forward from where we are. And the bottom line in
this debate is that if we do nothing, unlike most other issues that
come before this House, if we do nothing, bad things do happen. Because
the moratorium that Floridians have slept under the protection of for
the last 25 years begins to expire as soon as 2007, and it continues on
in the expiration into 2012 when drilling will be far closer to our
coast than anyone wants in this Chamber.
So I commend the gentleman for his leadership. I urge people to
support the bill, I urge them to give every consideration to the
Bilirakis amendment, and let us move this thing forward.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Farr).
Mr. FARR. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
This bill is an ignorant bill. This bill is a greed bill. It ignores
getting away from the oil addiction. If oil is the street drug
addiction, why at a time of energy independence are we increasing the
addiction? You don't give alcoholics more alcohol to get them cured.
It is a greed-producing bill. Mr. Markey pointed out that 80 percent
of the drillable Federal land is already in the oil companies' hands.
The bill steals State and local control. Why would the author go
against his own State legislature, his own Governor, who opposes this
legislation? Why would the President sign a bill such as this, which
has a direct conflict with our own U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy
which recommended that oil-gas leasing revenues be dedicated to ocean
and coastal resources? There is no dedication in this bill.
This bill is a financial and environmental disaster. A ``no'' vote
allows improvement.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Nebraska (Mr. Osborne).
Mr. OSBORNE. Mr. Chairman, most Americans believe that we need to
increase our renewable fuels and decrease
[[Page H4836]]
our dependency on foreign oil. And you may say, well, what does this
have to do with the bill before us? The reason is that 30 to 50 percent
of our corn crop is based on fertilizer. If you don't have fertilizer,
it reduces dramatically the amount of corn you produce and the amount
of ethanol.
Last year, we produced 4 billion gallons of ethanol in the United
States, and 1.6 billion was directly attributable to fertilizer. The
problem is that you can't produce fertilizer if you don't have natural
gas. We have some of the most expensive fertilizer in the world and the
highest natural gas prices.
We absolutely have to get this under control. We have tremendous
supplies, but we can't get at them because of the regulations. So this
makes sense for our economy, and it certainly makes sense for our
farmers, our agriculture, and our renewable fuels.
I urge support of this bill. It is absolutely essential for our
economy that we take action at this time. I support H.R. 4761.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, how much time remains on both sides?
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from West Virginia has 8 minutes
remaining, and the gentleman from California has 18 minutes remaining.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Florida (Ms. Corrine Brown), who represents the coastlines of Florida.
Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, during the State of the
Union message, I thought I was having a flashback. I thought I was
watching ``Dallas'' and J. R. Ewing was talking to us.
But, no, I was actually listening to the President of the United
States, George W. Bush; and he was saying that we were hooked on oil.
Funny. We are hooked on oil. Yet that was the same day that oil
companies announced the largest profit in the history of the United
States, $39 billion.
Yes, folks, we have got a problem, an energy problem. But let us not
compound it by destroying Florida's coasts. In the past, the Florida
delegation has always worked together, unified, to protect the coast of
Florida. As former Governor and Senator Bob Graham used to say, if you
live long enough, you will be a Floridian.
Eighty percent of the Floridians do not support drilling off the
coast of Florida. Vote ``no'' on this horrible bill.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Louisiana (Mr. Melancon).
Mr. MELANCON. Thank you, Mr. Pombo.
Mr. Chairman, as I have expressed earlier and on numerous occasions,
this oil and gas exploration is not what it was 50 years ago when it
started offshore. Back then, yes, they discharged off the sides of the
rigs. They didn't worry about the environment.
In these days and times, not only is the technology so much better,
but so is the enforcement of all the environmental laws. That includes
offshore oil drilling.
It has been a boon. And I tell my friends from Florida, you are
putting artificial reefs out there that will bring fish. And if you
think you have got tourists now and you think you have got good fishing
now, these oil rigs will not hurt that whatsoever.
I wish we had the beaches that you have. We don't. We have lost our
beaches because through the years Louisiana has provided the oil and
gas, approximately, these days, 30 percent of what is consumed by this
Nation. And for decades we have received zero for our efforts on behalf
of this country.
After Katrina, after Rita, hundreds of square miles of Louisiana
disappeared. It is gone. The only way we will ever be able to revive it
or bring it back is to rebuild and restore our coastal marshes. Those
coastal marshes are also responsible for about 25 percent of the
seafood consumed in this country.
That estuary, that marsh, that coastal land that we have lost, for
years this Congress and previous administrations have put into bills
``wants.'' Wants. We have been asking for years for help for things we
need. And what we need is coastal protection. What we need is to
preserve and bring back our coastal areas. What we need is barrier
islands. What we need is to protect the Louisianans that produce the
oil, the gas, and the fisheries for this country.
I stand here today, as I have on all of my votes, and say that this
bill provides for those States that do not wish to drill, that do not
want to contribute to the national effort to make us energy
independent. You have an option to not do that, and that is called
States' rights. That is one of the strongest parts of this bill that I
think solves, or should solve, the problem or the conscience of those
people who represent Americans who aren't fed up yet with $3-plus gas,
who aren't fed up yet with the cost of natural gas, and who,
apparently, must not be reading the paper or watching TV, if there are
any like that.
{time} 1545
I am so glad to see that we brought this bill to the floor. It is
historic, in my mind. Louisiana, ladies and gentlemen, has been waiting
decades for this help.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, since the time is so tilted, I would hope
that my chairman from California would use more time before I yield my
next amount of time.
Before I do that, I do want to commend the gentleman from Louisiana
who has just spoken. Although we deliver on this issue, he has done his
State and his district superbly. He has been patient, persistent and
has worked with me on this issue, as has the chairman, I might add. I
do want to salute Mr. Melancon for the tremendous work and patience he
has had on this legislation.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Hawaii (Mr. Abercrombie).
(Mr. ABERCROMBIE asked and was given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, it is an opportunity for me to thank
those who helped put this legislation together. I don't want to engage
in a refutation of what in some instances can only be termed
accusations with respect to the bill. I don't want to reply in a manner
which sets us up in a confrontational way but rather to try to put some
perspective on this issue, as I see it, as a member of the Resources
Committee. I would rather talk about what the bill does do, rather than
what its inadequacies might be.
I got started in this bill because of my response to the arguments
made by Mr. Peterson in committee. We pay attention in committee.
Committee hearings and briefings are what gives us the opportunity to
educate ourselves, and that is where I came to the table.
I didn't know enough about this issue, and I learned about it. What I
discovered was, particularly where natural gas was concerned, that we
needed to have it. Natural gas is the alternative energy available to
us now. It is the bridge to the alternative energy future that we want.
None of us are opposing any of the alternatives that have been put
forward today. We are saying we have to get there. In order to do that,
we have to recognize that lifting the moratorium on the Outer
Continental Shelf is the way to do it. It can be done safely. It can be
done responsibly.
Issues have been made about revenue. You can't get any revenue when
you don't have it coming in; 100 percent of nothing is nothing. Arguing
about where the revenue is going to go, whether it is the States in
some formula, whether it comes back to the Federal Government, as the
Congressional Budget Office now argues the bill does, is something that
we can address in time to come when this bill leaves the House and goes
to the Senate and hopefully comes back for a conference.
No one is dismissing any of the legitimate concerns that have been
made by those who are now in opposition to the bill. We can take all
those issues up.
We have labor support now. Construction trades are for the bill,
because we are going to create jobs.
When we talk about revenue, numbers have been tossed around and up to
today as high as $600 billion. That money is leaving the United States.
That money is not here for investment in jobs in the future of our
country.
If that is in fact what is at stake, if those billions of dollars are
at stake, let us put it together in a manner that keeps jobs and that
money in this country. Let's seek energy independence in this Nation.
[[Page H4837]]
The time for natural gas exploration and extrication of energy
resources in the Outer Continental Shelf has come. Simply to cite 25
years of saying no, no, no does not solve our problem.
So I ask those who have some reservations about today's bill, move
this bill forward. We will take up all the considerations that you have
raised. Let's move to energy independence in this Nation. Let's move to
a time when we can say that we met the responsibilities of our time.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you.
I appreciate the tone of my friend, the gentleman from Hawaii, but I
think it is time for us, instead of having a collection of proposals
that are basically an attractive grab bag politically engineered that
has some attractive provisions, there is a provision in there that is
very attractive to me that deals with rural education.
I think it is important that, instead, we deal with this in a
thoughtful, comprehensive fashion that doesn't entail the costs of
hundreds of billions of dollars off the top, that doesn't have a lop-
sided process in favor of drilling pristine areas and biased against
protection, making it harder to protect.
There are technical items in here about calculation of oil shale
royalties. These are provisions nobody in the House of Representatives
fully understands. That bears more scrutiny.
The notion of allowing oil equipment to remain out there in the ocean
and not being removed under current law is not necessarily of an
environmentally benign era. Environmentalists are very concerned. I
would reject this politically engineered energy grab bag and work
together on a policy that is safe, economical and will happen sooner.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Keller).
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this bill.
Mr. Chairman, opposition to this bill on environmental grounds cannot
be justified.
First, the industry safety record for exploration is impressive. For
example, oil rigs in the western half of the Gulf of Mexico endured
Hurricane Katrina without any spills.
Second, according to the Washington Post editorial board, not
allowing any drilling whatsoever past the 100-mile mark may increase
the danger of oil spills, because it means more incoming traffic from
oil tankers, which are riskier than oil rigs. As you recall, the Exxon
Valdez accident was an oil tanker, not an oil rig.
It is for these reasons, among others, that Governor Jeb Bush of
Florida has endorsed this bill, as has the Washington Post editorial
board. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this legislation.
Mr. RAHALL. May I have the time again, please?
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Virginia has 6 minutes remaining.
The gentleman from California has 10\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from Maryland (Mr. Bartlett).
(Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland asked and was given permission to revise
and extend his remarks.)
Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, today oil is above $70 a
barrel. The world has either peaked or will very shortly peak in oil
production. We will, of necessity, have to transition to renewables.
I am not going to vote for any drilling anywhere until we have a
rational plan for transitioning to renewables. We have now run out of
time and run out of energy. Additional drilling will buy us a little
time to give us a little energy, but I will not vote for that until we
have a rational plan.
Secondly, Mr. Chairman, we are now leaving our kids the largest
intergenerational debt transfer in the history of the world. In all
conscience, can we also deny them the oil and the gas that they are
going to need for their civilization?
There is a true moral element to this. I have 10 kids, 15 grandkids
and two great grandchildren. I want to leave them a little oil, please.
Vote ``no.''
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to one of the chief
authors of the legislation, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Peterson).
Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. I thank the gentleman. I want to thank
him for all of his work, and I want to thank all involved in the staff,
because this is not an easy process, but it is one that I think has
brought us to this position.
Mr. Chairman, what we are talking about today is helping America
compete for the first time in the history of this country. We are not
the only big dog in the world. We must compete with the Chinas, the
Taiwans, Indias, who have a plan to take every business that
manufactures and produces away from us.
Our steel companies have the highest energy prices in the world
because we have the highest gas prices. Our wood and paper product
companies have the highest energy costs in the world because of our
natural gas prices. Polymers and plastics not only use a lot of energy,
but a lot of energy is consumed in the making of it. Petrochemicals, 55
percent of their cost is natural gas, and in America they pay the
highest price in the world. Why? Because we locked it up.
We don't want to drill for it. That is the only way you produce
natural gas, is to drill a hole in the ground, put a steel pipe in, and
let a harmless gas out that is one of the most valuable commodities in
the world.
Fifty percent of our fertilizer companies are now on foreign shores.
We will soon have none, and our farmers will rely on Russian
fertilizer, if they can get it and they can afford it, to grow the corn
to make the ethanol.
I talked to a big glass company in Pittsburgh, PPG. He said, I want
to stay here, I want to be in Pittsburgh, but I can't compete.
Last year's natural gas prices averaged $9.50. Five years ago, they
were $2. That is a five-fold increase. Those are wholesale prices. This
is not about oil companies. This is about America competing. This is
about homeowners being able to heat their homes. It is about small
businesses who consume a lot of energy to stay in business and make a
profit. It is about the blue collar workers that we ought to be
protecting and representing in this country, the blue collar workers
that want to raise their families and have a decent vehicle and send
their kids to college.
Someone said this is a budget breaker. For every $10 billion that
comes in, $5.8 billion will stay in the Treasury. How is that a budget
breaker? Every $10 billion, $5.8 billion, they are talking about that
because the environmental argument doesn't wash. If our shores are
threatened, I wouldn't support this bill.
I have enjoyed the Florida beaches and the North Carolina and South
Carolina beaches as much as anyone. Folks, they have been producing on
the Outer Continental Shelf in Canada forever. They have drilled in
Lake Erie, gas only, since 1916. Twenty-some hundred wells they drill
every summer.
Ireland has good beaches; Norway, an environmental country; UK,
Netherlands, Scotland, New Zealand, Australia. Folks, we are the only
society that has said we are going to lock up our resources. We are
going to buy them from foreign countries. We are going to buy them from
countries that don't support us. We are going to pay high prices. We
are going to enrich them so that they can own us. That is the path we
are on.
I am for renewables. Natural gas is the bridge to renewables. Natural
gas is a forerunner to hydrogen. The hydrogen cars will have a natural
gas tank. One-third of our auto fleet could be on natural gas at these
prices, and we could move almost 3 million barrels a day.
Folks, this is about America competing. For the first time, we have
countries who can clean our clock economically, and they are trying to.
Are we going to give them an energy advantage? Are we going to give our
jobs to China and Taiwan, hand it to them, because energy is a third
there of what it is here, Russia a fraction, South America, 1.5? We
will be buying our bricks and glass from Trinidad.
Folks, this is about workers in America who want to have a good job,
and affordable energy is the best thing we can do for them.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek).
Mr. MEEK. Mr. Chairman, I guess I want to quickly say that as someone
[[Page H4838]]
that is from Florida, that does know something about coastline and
intracoastal and who does know something about the economy that we
count on in Florida, we have people who travel throughout this world
who come and spend their dollars in this United States because this
Congress and the United States of America protected our beaches over
the years.
Now we know that oil companies are very, very pushy right now, and
they want all that they can get right now, in the moment. But, you
know, the thing may change respectively in another 2 or 3 months. This
wouldn't even be a discussion.
{time} 1600
We are in Florida. We are asking for no drilling whatsoever. We are
asking for alternative fuels and real investment and making sure that
we have flex vehicles, making sure that we can go on ethanol, making
sure that we can invest in the heartland and the Midwest versus the
Middle East.
We are all for energy independence, but I can tell you, not on the
backs of our environment, not on the backs of our economy, not on the
backs of individuals that have fought before us in this House of making
sure that we can at least keep some of our beaches oil free and not
have what some would want us to have as it relates to special
interests.
I respect the Members on the other side of this issue, Mr. Chairman,
but I think it is important for us to realize that it is not worth
going into these sensitive areas.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield the remainder of my time to the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), a very valuable member of
our Resources Committee, and the ranking member on the Financial
Services Committee.
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, right now in America, 80 percent of all of
the Outer Continental Shelf area where the oil and gas is already open
to the oil and gas industry. The only thing that has stopped the oil
and gas industry from going to much of the area in the Outer
Continental Shelf where 80 percent of the oil and gas is, which we all
agree they should be able to go to, today, under the law, with no
changes, is that the price of oil was $30 a barrel. But at $70 a
barrel, Shell and Exxon-Mobil are going there. So what is the debate
about? Well, yeah, I don't want them drilling off of Massachusetts, in
Georgia's bank, and the Floridians don't want them off their shore. But
that is really not what it is all about.
Right now, according to the Minerals Management Service, we can
expect $600 billion to go to the Federal Government for drilling right
down here in Federal land on land which is already open to the oil
companies. And that $600 billion is used and will be used to pay for
our troops in Iraq, to pay for the education of poor children, to
ensure that we can pay for Medicare benefits for senior citizens.
But what the majority is doing, what the Republican administration is
doing is they are going to take that $600 billion that would have gone
to the Federal Government, and they are moving it down here where only
four States are going to get the benefit of it. Only those four States
are going to be the beneficiaries.
Now, if you come from one of those four States, Texas, Louisiana,
Mississippi or Alabama, you vote for this bill and put out a press
release tonight. You tell everyone back in your districts in those four
States, we were able to convince the United States Congress to give us
$600 billion today.
And by the way, Huey Long used to say, ``every man a king.'' Well,
every man and woman will be a king in Louisiana after this. And God
bless them if they can pull it off today.
This is the king of all earmarks. It will take 200 amendments a day
from Mr. Flake for the next 50 years to get back this $600 billion. And
the Republicans, of course, will oppose the cuts that he will propose
out here on the House floor as well. So that is what it is all about.
It is about this shifting of money from all of the red States, 46
States, down to four States. And that is the game that is going on,
because the oil industry is already drilling in the Gulf on Federal
lands that we all agree they should go to today. And that is why the
Minerals Management Service, the Bush administration says that $600
billion will be lost to the Federal Treasury because over 80 percent of
all of the revenues that are going to be generated from this proposal
will go there.
And so, ladies and gentlemen, if you are out there listening, this
is, without question, also, nothing that can happen in your State that
will make up for the loss of this $600 billion. If this was any other
bill, we would be having a huge fight over what the formula should be
for who gets this money. But instead, in one fell swoop, the
Republicans are moving $600 billion from 46 States into four States.
Do not vote for this bill. This is a fiscal disaster. This money
should remain in the budget for the troops in Iraq. It should remain in
the budget for Medicare recipients. It should remain in the budget for
the poor children of our country.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of our time.
Well, it unfortunately hasn't been that enlightening of a debate
because we have had a number of people come to the floor and debate
things that either weren't in the bill or had nothing to do with the
bill. Fortunately, they decided to close with Mr. Markey, who debated
something that had nothing to do with our bill, which happens.
The truth of the matter is, when it comes to the cost of the bill, it
is a net revenue increase to the Federal Government, $2.3 billion over
5 years, $900 million over 10 years. That is what the bill does. So all
the numbers you heard about, 600 billion, 800 billion, how many
trillion, they pulled them out of the air. The CBO score on the bill is
$2.3 billion over 5 years in increased revenue to the Federal
Government.
We also heard that 80 percent of the OCS is already leased. Eighty
percent. That is strange because 85 percent of it is off limits. Eighty
percent of it is off limits. And yet they claim 80 percent of it is
already leased.
Talk about fuzzy numbers? That is about as fuzzy as it gets.
We also heard somebody come down here a little while ago, and I love
this, oh, we are going to cure it with CAFE standards. We are going to
raise CAFE standards. That is how we are going to cure our energy
problems.
Let me let you in on a dirty little secret on CAFE standards. U.S.
auto makers manufacture cars today that get 35, 40, 50 miles to the
gallon. What they want to mandate is not that car companies make cars
that get 50 miles to the gallon. They want to mandate that you have to
buy them. They want to mandate that their constituents have to buy
those cars because they are available today and they are not buying
them. So they want to force them down your throat because you won't buy
them.
Let's talk about energy policy. You know what our energy policy is in
this country? Our energy policy is no, we are not going to develop
domestic energy, period.
For 30 years, we have had the same people coming down here making the
same arguments as to why we can't develop a domestic energy source. And
it doesn't matter if it is natural gas or oil or hydro or solar or wind
or what it is. It makes no difference. They are still a no. There is
always a reason to be no.
We had the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge, and they vote ``no.''
We had a bill last year on the floor that expanded wind, solar,
geothermal. They voted ``no.'' We have had the opportunity five times
to vote on an energy bill that put money into alternative energy,
renewable energy, conservation, and they voted ``no.'' No, no, no. No
domestic energy, nothing for our constituents, for our businesses, for
our economy.
And what was the result of all of that? The result is that in the
early 1970s and the mid-1970s, when we had our first energy crisis and
OPEC cut us off and we had gas lines, we were dependent on foreign
energy for 33 percent of our energy. In their 30 years of policy, today
we depend on foreign countries for 66 percent of our energy.
You can't be no on everything. Everything that has been proposed, no
matter what it was, the answer was no.
Now, you might think, well, they must have an alternative. There must
be something else they want to do. Well, maybe it is, but they have
failed to tell anybody, because they oppose everything.
This bill was a compromise. This bill was a compromise between the 24
different bills that have been introduced
[[Page H4839]]
in this Congress alone on offshore gas development, oil and gas
development. Twenty-four bills. The two major bills, one was introduced
by Mr. Peterson and Mr. Abercrombie, and it dealt mainly with natural
gas. The other one by Mr. Melancon and Mr. Jindal. And we sat down and
we tried to work out the differences between those bills.
And, obviously, the coastal States have something to say about what
happens off their coasts. I don't care how many times you come down
here and rant and rave, the coastal States have something to say about
what happens on their coasts. And we had to include them in this. We
had to include them in the negotiations and them in the debate.
And the decision was made that for the first time in our history that
we would give the States, the coastal States, the ability to protect
100 miles off their coast. It would be up to the State legislature and
the Governor for whether or not they wanted any kind of development. If
they chose not to, they wouldn't get it. If they chose they want it,
then it would be, the opportunity would be there for them to do it. And
if they chose to, they would share in the revenue, exactly the way we
do on onshore public lands. Exactly the same way.
I am telling you, it is time to stop saying no. It is time to move
forward with energy policy that makes sense for all of America, not
just a small group of special interests who want to destroy our
economy.
Mr. STARK. Mr. Chairman, even if I supported offshore drilling--which
I don't--I certainly wouldn't do it through this fiscally reckless and
convoluted bill.
The Domestic Energy Production through Offshore Exploration and
Equitable Treatment of State Holdings Act makes it far easier for
states to allow drilling than to prevent it. It bribes states into
allowing offshore drilling by increasing their share of royalties from
27 percent to 50 percent, at a cost to the federal government of $600
billion over 60 years. If a state takes no action to facilitate natural
gas drilling in the immediate year or oil drilling in the next three
years, then this law would open its waters for drilling. In order to
maintain a moratorium on drilling, a state legislature would have to
vote to prohibit drilling every five years. How many states will be
able to resist billions of dollars in exchange for doing nothing?
H.R. 4761 also guts the environmental review process and makes all
other uses of the Outer Continental Shelf subordinate to drilling, even
in states than continue to ban drilling. According to the bill, ''No
Federal agency may permit construction or operation of any facility,
that will be incompatible with. . . oil and gas or natural gas
leasing.'' So if your state wants to operate a marine sanctuary, it
better pass the Pombo oil compatibility test.
All this, and for what? Drilling is already allowed in areas that
have 80 percent of offshore oil and natural gas reserves. This bill
simultaneously endangers our coasts and delays an urgently needed
transformation to a clean energy economy. I vote no to yet another
Republican attempt to maintain our oil addiction.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Chairman, because I firmly
oppose drilling for oil off the coasts of Florida, I believe that it is
critical that a permanent, state-controlled ban on drilling around the
entire state becomes law as soon as possible. This is why I believe the
Pombo-Putnam compromise in H.R. 4761, the Domestic Energy Production
through Offshore Exploration and Equitable Treatment of State Holdings
Act of 2006, is essential in order to protect Florida's beaches.
The Pombo-Putnam compromise would allow Florida to prohibit drilling
for 100 miles. In negotiations with the legislation's authors and in
the House Rules Committee, I worked to further protect Florida's
environmental treasures. As successfully amended, the compromise would
also codify the ban on drilling within the ``military mission line''--
approximately 234 miles from Tampa--to provide even more protection for
Florida's west coast.
This plan, in many ways, is better than a bill that the Florida
delegation almost unanimously cosponsored in 1997. That bipartisan
legislation sought to prohibit any leasing or drilling within 100 miles
of Florida's coasts, but did not include the added protection provided
by the ``military mission line.'' It also lacked the factor of state
control of the drilling issue. Former Governor Lawton Chiles also
supported, in writing, a 100-mile ban on drilling.
Presently, Florida's only protections against offshore oil drilling
reside with an expiring presidential promise (known as the
``moratoria'') and a year-to-year appropriations limitation amendment--
a technical legislative maneuver that prohibits Federal funds from
being used to conduct offshore leasing.
The stark reality Florida faces is not only the expiring
``moratoria,'' but also a strong push in Congress to allow drilling as
close as 20 miles from our shores. On May 18 of this year, the House
passed an amendment by a close 217-203 vote to prevent drilling as
close as three miles from Florida's east coast and nine miles from
Florida's west coast. Eight cosponsors of a bill (H.R. 4318) to allow
drilling just 20 miles off Florida's coasts voted for this amendment
because they felt that three miles was just too close. Had those eight
cosponsors voted against that amendment, the vote would have been lost
211-209, and drilling would have been allowed as close as three miles
from Florida's coast. Although they voted for this particular
amendment, our colleagues assured us that they would vote in favor of
legislation to allow drilling at 20 miles. Instead of relying on votes
from over 400 Congressmen from outside of Florida, I support placing
the fate of Florida's beaches in the hands of Floridians.
In 2005, Congressional passage of a plan was possible that would have
permanently banned drilling within 125 miles of our beaches. On June
29, 2006, we learned, by a vote of 65 to 353, that a majority in
Congress no longer supports a 125-mile ban. Last year's offer of 125
miles has now been reduced to 100 miles from our coastline. The next
step could very well be a horrible 20 miles. As a strong opponent of
drilling, I believe that our window of opportunity in Congress for a
permanent ban on offshore drilling is closing. This is why I support
the Pombo-Putnam compromise.
Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Chairman, because I firmly
oppose drilling for oil off the coasts of Florida, I believe that it is
critical that a permanent, State-controlled ban on drilling around the
entire state becomes law a soon as possible. This is why I believe the
Pombo-Putnam compromise in H.R. 4761, the Domestic Energy Production
Through Offshore Exploration and Equitable Treatment of State Holdings
Act of 2006, is essential in order to protect Florida's beaches.
The Pombo-Putnam compromise would allow Florida to prohibit drilling
for 100 miles. In negotiations with the legislation's authors and in
the House Rules Committee, I worked to further protect Florida's
environmental treasures. As successfully amended, the compromise would
also codify the ban on drilling within the ``military mission line''--
approximately 234 miles from Tampa--to provide even more protection for
Florida's west coast.
This plan, in many ways, is better than a bill that the Florida
delegation almost unanimously cosponsored in 1997. That bipartisan
legislation sought to prohibit any leasing or drilling within 100 miles
of Florida's coasts, but did not include the added protection provided
by the ``military mission line.'' It also lacked the factor of State
control of the drilling issue. Former Governor Lawton Chiles also
supported, in writing, a 100-mile ban on drilling.
Presently, Florida's only protections against offshore oil drilling
reside with an expiring Presidential promise (known as the
``moratoria'') and a year-to-year appropriations limitation amendment--
a technical legislative maneuver that prohibits Federal funds from
being used to conduct offshore leasing.
The stark reality Florida faces is not only the expiring
``moratoria,'' but also a strong push in Congress to allow drilling as
close as 20 miles from our shores. On May 18 of this year, the House
passed an amendment by a close 217-203 vote to prevent drilling as
close as 3 miles from Florida's east coast and 9 miles from Florida's
west coast. Eight cosponsors of a bill (H.R. 4318) to allow drilling
just 20 miles off Florida's coasts voted for this amendment because
they felt that 3 miles was just too close. Had those eight cosponsors
voted against that amendment, the vote would have been lost 211-209,
and drilling would have been allowed as close as 3 miles from Florida's
coast. Although they voted for this particular amendment, our
colleagues assured us that they would vote in favor of legislation to
allow drilling at 20 miles. Instead of relying on votes from over 400
Congressmen from outside of Florida, I support placing the fate of
Florida's beaches in the hands of Floridians.
In 2005, congressional passage of a plan was possible that would have
permanently banned drilling within 125 miles of our beaches. On June
29, 2006, we learned, by a vote of 65 to 353, that a majority in
Congress no longer supports a 125-mile ban. Last year's offer of 125
miles has now been reduced to 100 miles from our coastline. The next
step could very well be a horrible 20 miles. As a strong opponent of
drilling, I believe that our window of opportunity in Congress for a
permanent ban on offshore drilling is closing. This is why I support
the Pombo-Putnam compromise.
Mr. UDALL of Colorado. I agree with President Bush that an America
now ``addicted to oil'' needs to reduce its dependency on petroleum and
other fossil fuels.
And as a chair of the Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Caucus,
I strongly support legislation aimed at achieving that goal,
[[Page H4840]]
including greater investments in renewable energy sources (such as
wind, sun, and biofuels) that also will boost our economy, create jobs,
and revitalize rural communities.
Still, some additional development of the oil and gas resources of
the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) would be desirable to help meet our
immediate needs, and I could support appropriate legislation to achieve
that result.
Unfortunately, I do not think this bill is appropriate, and I cannot
support it as it stands.
The bill's provisions dealing with the OCS are excessively
complicated and costly, and the bill also includes a plethora of
unrelated and unnecessary provisions, including changes in the rules
for onshore leases and a section dealing with oil shale royalties that
I think is particularly troublesome.
In the Resources Committee, I offered an amendment that would have
made this a much simpler bill. It would have deleted all the
complicated provisions dealing with State legislation, different rules
for different parts of the offshore lands, and the disposition of
Federal revenues--not to mention the section about oil shale. It would
have replaced all that with a short and simple requirement for the
Interior Department to lease within a year the lands within the so-
called ``181 Area'' in the Gulf of Mexico.
My amendment was essentially identical to a bill--S. 2253--introduced
by Senators Domenici and Bingaman with 28 cosponsors, from both sides
of the aisle and already approved by the Senate's Committee on Energy
and Natural Resources by a bipartisan vote of 16 to 5. Its groundwork
has been laid by the Department of the Interior over a number of years,
including completion of environmental reviews and consultation with
coastal States and the public.
The amendment would have put only two limits on the requirement for
leasing the 181 area.
First, it said that one part--the part east of a ``military mission
line''--could only be leased if the Defense Department had agreed in
advance that development there can be done without interfering with
military activities. That responded to issues raised by Secretary
Rumsfeld last year in a letter to the Senate's Armed Services
Committee.
And, second, the amendment said there could be no leasing within 100
miles of the Florida coastline. That, of course, responded to concerns
about potential adverse effects on that State's coastal areas.
According to the Mineral Management Service, the whole 181 area has
about 930 million barrels of recoverable oil and more than 6 trillion
cubic feet of recoverable natural gas. And the same agency's numbers
show that even if the Defense Department were to say there would be no
leasing east of the military mission line, there would still be about
800 million barrels of recoverable oil and nearly 5 trillion cubic feet
of recoverable natural gas in the rest of the 181 area. Thus, my
amendment would have cleared the way for rapid development of
significant new supplies of energy. And it would have done so without
the complications that caused the Administration to testify that they
have ``serious concerns'' about the bill as it stands.
If our goal is to get more energy from offshore areas, I think it
would make more sense to start with simple and straightforward
legislation that's based on sound science and that has some strong
support, including from a significant number of our colleagues in the
other body.
My amendment followed that approach--but, unfortunately, the
committee did not adopt it.
As a result, we must vote today on this seriously flawed bill which,
according to the Congressional Budget Office, will ``increase net
direct spending by about $900 million in 2007, $3.2 billion over the
2007-2011 period, and $11.0 billion over the 2007-2016 period.''
Those are sobering numbers. And even if the bill is revised along the
lines proposed by some of its supporters, I expect any change in that
estimate to be marginal, and will have no significant effect on the
bottom line. I am not ready to support increased mandatory spending on
the scale that will result from this bill while our country is at war
and we are running persistent budget deficits that must be financed by
increases in the national debt our children will be required to repay
with interest.
And I think if anything CBO underestimates the potential costs of
this bill to the taxpayers, because their estimate does not discuss all
of the provisions not directly related to offshore leasing.
For example, while the estimate does discuss section 17's requirement
that the Interior Department comply with lessees' requests for the
government to repurchase and cancel leases (and compensate their
holders) under certain circumstances, it does not note that the chances
of such required payments are increased by section 19, which would
impose a series of tight deadlines which the Interior Department must
meet if it is to avoid a demand for compensation.
It could be that CBO isn't able to estimate how much money that might
cost--and, even if they could, that estimate would not include other
costs, including the likelihood that the deadlines will lead the
Interior Department to put so much emphasis on speed that they will be
less careful in the way they assess potential problems and will not
ensure appropriate steps to mitigate those problems. This would not be
good for the owners of private surface properties underlain by Federal
minerals, for affected communities, or for the environment.
Further, the estimate does not even mention section 24, which would
prohibit the Department of the Interior from adjusting the fees it
charges for actions related to mineral leases. This applies to both
offshore and onshore leases, and could result in requiring the
taxpayers to shoulder the burden of paying for things that otherwise
would be the responsibility of the mineral lessees.
And, CBO says nothing about Section 29, which deals with oil shale.
Colorado has lots of oil shale, so we have a special interest in the
subject. But it's important for the whole country, as an energy
resource, and it's important to all taxpayers because most of it, as
Federal property, belongs to them.
That means that all the taxpayers have an interest in how it is
developed and what return they the taxpayers, will get for this
resource. And both those interests--in oil shale as an energy source
and in fair treatment for the taxpayers--are reflected in current law.
Specifically, section 369(o) of the 2005 Energy Policy Act says the
Secretary of the Interior will set royalties and other payments for oil
shale leases at levels that will do two things--first, ``encourage
development'' of oil shale; and, second, ``ensure a fair return to the
United States,'' meaning to the taxpayers.
I was not a big fan of most parts of last year's energy bill, but I
think that provision is good policy. So, I am troubled that part of
section 29 of this bill would repeal it and replace it with what can
only be described as legislative price fixing.
The relevant part of section 29 starts by telling the Secretary of
the Interior to ``model'' tar sand and oil shale royalties on the
royalty program now used in one Canadian province. But then it goes on
to say that the Secretary would have to reduce the actual rates in
accordance with ``a sliding scale'' based on a complicated formula
based on the monthly average price of ``NYMEX West Texas Intermediate
crude oil at Cushing, Oklahoma.''
I'm not an expert on oil prices, but it's easy to understand what is
involved here. It's Congressional micromanagement in the form of
legislating a formula for royalty rates.
It's an attempt to have Congress--not the Secretary--decide a very
technical issue that could affect a lot of money. And it's the kind of
thing that should raise suspicions in anybody who cares about making
sure the taxpayers get a fair shake, especially because the supporters
of the bill have made it clear that they put more emphasis on
encouraging production than on ensuring that the Federal Government--
and the local Governments with whom the revenues are to be shared--will
get a fair return.
As the Interior Department proceeds to implement the current law,
there will be ample opportunity for all of us to weigh in if we think
the Secretary is not doing a good job in setting royalty rates. In the
meantime, I think Congress should not try to set the rate through
legislation.
That was why I opposed including a similar provision in the
reconciliation legislation when the Resources Committee debated it
earlier this year, and why I was glad when it was finally dropped from
that legislation. But, like a bad penny, it turned up again in this
bill--and is still the same bad idea as before.
So, in committee I offered an amendment to strike this attempt at
long-term political price-fixing, and to replace it with the language
of the current law that says the Secretary is to set royalties that
will encourage development and ensure a fair return to the taxpayer.
Unfortunately, that amendment was not adopted, either, which is another
reason I cannot support the bill.
In fairness, I should note that the bill does include some worthwhile
provisions. One example is the provisions aimed at closing OCS royalty-
rate loopholes that have unduly reduced the return to the taxpayers.
Another is section 23, which deals with support for accredited
petroleum and mining schools, applied geology and geophysics programs,
and individuals pursuing degrees in petroleum and mining engineering
and related subjects.
Overall, though, the bill's good parts are so outweighed by its
defects that I cannot support it.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to H.R.
4761, the Offshore Drilling bill. I do so not because I am
categorically opposed to expanding the scope of offshore drilling, but
because I believe this bill does so in an irresponsible fashion. As
proponents of the bill have correctly stated, Canada and Norway have
both allowed offshore
[[Page H4841]]
drilling in an environmentally sound manner. In particular, I believe
we can increase our supply of clean natural gas through expanded
offshore drilling. This bill, however, would create a blank check for
oil and gas drilling without adequate oversight and environmental
safeguards.
Moreover, this bill diverts much-needed funds from the Federal
Government to the States and creates hurdles for States that would
prefer to opt-out of costal drilling. In order to create incentives for
states to approve offshore drilling, the bill would divert money from
leases in Federal waters to States. This includes existing leases that
are currently generating Federal revenue. This loss of funds would only
increase our ballooning deficit. As the Bush Administration itself has
reported to Congress, this bill will reduce Federal revenue from oil
leases by several hundred billion dollars in the years ahead.
The bill's proponents claim that states can choose not to drill off
their shores. But the hurdles it creates makes opting out difficult. In
order to protect their waters from drilling within 50 to 100 miles,
governors would have to get the concurrence of their State legislatures
within one year to petition the Department of the Interior to prevent
natural gas only leasing, and within three years to prevent oil
leasing. States must re-petition every five years to maintain the
protections. And the legislation entices states to drill within 50
miles of the coastline by offering between 50 and 75 percent of the
revenues if they opt-in. With such an incentive, valid environmental
concerns may easily lose to fiscal ones.
Mr. Speaker, we must to take action to develop a comprehensive energy
strategy. That requires a policy that includes energy supply, energy
efficiency, and energy conservation. We can increase our domestic
production of oil and gas through responsible offshore drilling. This
bill does not do that. Moreover, this bill does nothing to promote
renewable sources of energy that are critical to reducing our
dependence on foreign oil and fossil fuels. We must adopt a
comprehensive long-term energy policy in order to achieve important
national security, environmental and economic objectives.
Unfortunately, this bill represents a lost opportunity to meet these
goals.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chairman, more than 80 percent of the area in the
Outer Continental Shelf is off-limits to energy development, while the
Department of Energy estimates that maintaining U.S. economic growth
through 2025 will require a 40 percent increase in natural gas.
I rise in support of H.R. 4716, the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act--
a vote for H.R. 4761 is a vote for agriculture. Currently, natural gas
makes up 90 percent of the production cost of anhydrous ammonia, a
nitrogen fertilizer and the chemical building block for all other
nitrogen fertilizer products.
Nitrogen fertilizer is used on all crops produced in this country,
but it is a key plant nutrient to produce corn a critical crop to
Illinois farmers.
Since 2002, thirty-six percent of the U.S. nitrogen fertilizer
industry has been shut down or slowed. This loss of U.S. production has
had a significant impact on the American farmer. The continued loss of
production from the domestic nitrogen industry would force U.S. farmers
to rely on a highly uncertain and highly volatile world market with no
assurance that they will be able to obtain enough product to meet their
full demand.
This is particularly important when considering the importance of
nitrogen to farmers. For example, according to the University of
Illinois, 30-50 percent of corn yields can be directly attributed to
nitrogen fertilizer.
Farm input prices have not gone down but have escalated at a record
pace. Nitrogen prices have climbed over 80 percent during this time
period resulting in over a 50 percent increase in a typical corn
farmer's fertilizer bill.
Just as disturbing, since 2003--Illinois has lost more than 56,000
manufacturing jobs. Natural gas availability and skyrocketing price
increases the cost of doing business and hurt the ability of Illinois
manufacturers to compete in the global economy.
New supply of natural gas from the Outer Continental Shelf is needed
to give U.S. agriculture and manufacturing sectors access to affordable
and reliable sources of fertilizer and energy. Please support H.R. 4761
to ease the burden on U.S. farmers. A vote for H.R. 4761 is a vote for
agriculture.
Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition of H.R. 4761, which
would open the entire Outer Continental Shelf to drilling for both oil
and gas. Before looking to open up more area for drilling, we need to
develop a comprehensive energy policy that emphasizes conservation, as
well as increasing our supply with renewable and nonrenewable energy
resources.
We need to increase our supply of energy, but it is imperative we
first take bold action to reduce our demand for oil. This legislation
takes the wrong approach to our energy policy by not challenging
Americans to use energy in more responsible ways.
The bottom line is we are not resolving our energy needs because we
are not conserving. We'll just continue to consume more and waste more,
consume more and waste more, and act like it doesn't matter. We are on
a demand course that is simply unsustainable.
Drilling is the wrong answer to the right question of how do we meet
our energy needs? Before we increase our supply of energy, we must
first take control of our over-consumption.
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, today I am voting for the Deep Ocean Energy
Resources Act; however, I do so with reservations.
I agree that we need to end our dependence on foreign oil, and I
believe that this legislation will benefit our economy by increasing
domestic energy supply and creating American jobs. However, I am
concerned with a number of provisions in the bill. In particular, I am
concerned about the overly generous revenue sharing provisions that
direct money away from the federal treasury to coastal states. I know
improvements have been made in the manager's amendment adopted today,
but I hope we continue to discuss the proper balance between the state
and federal share of revenues generated from a federal asset.
I also have reservations about the potential for this legislation to
weaken federal environmental laws. Finally, I have concerns with the
power we are giving states over waters as far as 200 miles off their
coasts. What coordination is there with the federal government in terms
of jurisdiction over these waters, such as impacts on shipping lanes
and other national or international priorities?
I believe that in order to truly end our dependence on foreign oil we
need to pass legislation that promotes conservation and alternative
energy sources, and increases domestic production in a manner that
limits the potential for damage to our invaluable coastlines, national
parks, forests, and other natural resources.
My vote today is a vote to move this process along, but I hope any
conference report or final bill brought before us will address these
concerns and my vote on a bill going to the President will be based on
how these issues are resolved.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 4761.
Once again, Congress wants to give a handout to Big Oil and jeopardize
the environment instead of working for an energy policy that would
benefit all Americans. The oil companies and their Republican partners
in Congress are seeking to exploit our concern over high oil prices to
force through a controversial, destructive, ill-conceived measure.
This legislation will allow big oil and gas companies to profit by
bribing coastal states to lift their drilling bans with the promise of
quick cash in the form of royalties. H.R. 4761 would make these monies
available by shifting off-shore drilling royalties from the federal
government to the states. The Bush Administration's own Minerals and
Management Service (MMS) has estimated that this bill could cost the
federal government $600 billion in lost royalty revenues over the next
sixty years. The only reason we're even able to consider this bill is
because the Republicans waived the rules that normally protect the
taxpayers from deficit spending and new entitlements.
Of course, states that choose not to open their coasts to drilling
would receive no royalties. But, Mr. Chairman, oil spills do not
respect political boundaries. An offshore spill from one state could
easily cripple the coastal economies of its neighbors. Those states
that choose to protect their sensitive shorelines from drilling would
still have to face the consequences of their neighboring state's
decision to allow the oil companies in.
The sponsors of this bill claim that their proposal poses no threat
to the environment. Yet, the bill drops the requirement for oil and gas
companies to prepare an environmental impact statement in order to get
a lease for drilling. Not only would H.R. 4761 expose more of our
coastline to environmental destruction, it would free oil and gas
companies from existing requirements to clean up their operations and
restore the drilling site when they are finished with it. Unbelievably,
it would allow the oil companies to dump their abandoned oil rigs in
the ocean. Make no mistake about it: this bill is a blank check to Big
Oil, and the price will be paid by ordinary Americans.
Mr. Chairman, this bill is no way to solve America's energy crisis.
Congress has set and sustained a precedent for wise stewardship of our
sensitive coastlines for the last 25 years, knowing that one offshore
oil spill would cripple our pristine beaches, fisheries and coastal
economies. Let's not permanently terminate this time-honored tradition
by giving away America's coasts to the highest bidder. I urge my
colleagues to vote no on this ill-conceived, destructive legislation.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Deep Ocean
Energy Resources Act. The legislation before us represents a balanced
approach to expanding domestic energy production and, for the first
time, gives
[[Page H4842]]
states an opportunity to determine what occurs along their shores.
I represent a coastal California district that includes beautiful
beaches up and down the City of San Clemente's shoreline. I take the
responsibility to protect those beautiful beaches seriously and I have
worked with local officials over the years to do just that. I would not
be supporting the bill if I did not believe it gave local and state
officials the necessary authorities they need to protect our invaluable
coastlines. Our coastal states deserve the right to make energy
production decisions that affect their people, environment, and
economy.
I also believe we must ensure that our military needs throughout the
Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) are accounted for and protected. Our
military conducts significant training and operations in the OCS to
protect our mainland and maintain readiness for future conflicts. As
many of my colleagues from the Armed Services Committee know, military
training and operations are under a seemingly constant threat of
encroachment from many sources.
In fact, just this week a lawsuit was filed by an environmental group
to prevent the Navy from conducting exercises in the Pacific Ocean.
While people will undoubtedly disagree about the merits of the lawsuit,
there should be no disagreement about the fact that the cumulative
effect of encroachments upon our military restricts the ability of our
servicemembers to protect our nation.
To that end, I believe we must enact OCS drilling policies that do
not place another level of work-around restrictions on our military and
require OCS leasing programs be developed with the consultation and
concurrence of the Secretary of Defense. We did so in the Energy Policy
Act as it relates to siting LNG facilities and we should do it again in
the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act as we develop OCS energy supply. I
look forward to working with my colleagues on the Armed Services
Committee and Resources Committee to ensure that any OCS drilling
legislation sent to the President provides the proper and necessary
authorities to protect our military ranges, training and operations.
With the July Fourth holiday just around the comer, Americans are
reminded of the liberties and freedoms secured by our nation's
military. There are many ways Americans can express their appreciation
for our military. One way this Congress can express our appreciation is
to enact policies that protect our military from unintended
encroachments to military training, operations, and readiness.
Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 4761,
the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act, which would end a twenty-five year
oil and natural gas drilling prohibition for most of the country's
offshore waters.
The increased strain that high-energy prices are having on the
pockets of many Americans, and the national security concerns over the
United States' dependence on foreign oil are real problems that deserve
thoughtful, multi-pronged policy solutions. While the severity of
current energy trends cannot be ignored, we cannot rush to drill before
first crafting a comprehensive energy policy with solutions for meeting
both our immediate and future energy needs. We must work to increase
vehicle fuel efficiency, spur investment in efficiency and renewable
energy research and technology, and improve conservation methods.
I respect the attempt to increase the states' ability to participate
in the planning of oil and gas development off their shores, however
H.R. 4671 goes too far and undermines the strong federal protections
for our coastal waters. H.R. 4671 purports to allow states to maintain
control of activities in their coastal waters, but instead ties states'
hands in many ways with unprecedented provisions. It subordinates every
other use of coastal waters to oil drilling, blocking any effort to use
waters in a way that could ever limit drilling, undermines states'
authority under the Coastal Zone Management Act, changes state marine
boundary maps, and it eliminates many environmental reviews and public
participation requirements for issuing oil leases and for exploration
and drilling activities. Clearly, this is of concern to our State and
other nearby States too (see attached Governor's letter).
I am also concerned that this legislation lifts the offshore drilling
ban, while we continue to ignore many conservation and alternative fuel
proposals, which would have a more immediate and beneficial effect on
meeting our energy needs.
H.R. 4761 does not simply deal with increased drilling, but instead
has other far-reaching implications for coastal states and federal
revenues. This legislation would create an open-ended fund for drilling
states, with no reporting requirements, at a time when we have a huge
federal deficit. The estimated cost of this transfer from federal
revenues to states is estimated to be several hundred billion dollars
over 60 years, according to President Bush's Statement of
Administration Policy.
While a thoughtful approach to offshore drilling is worthy of
consideration, this legislation is not good policy for Delaware or the
United States.
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to the Deep Ocean
Energy Resources Act (H.R. 4761). I fundamentally disagree with the
premise of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act that more drilling,
regardless of where it is, is the answer to energy independence.
I have read in the papers this week that this bill will be considered
on the House floor as part of an ``Energy week.'' Republicans would
like to use this bill to claim that Democrats are not committed to
ending our dependence on foreign oil or as a ruse to feign lowering gas
prices before the July 4th holiday weekend. This is simply not true.
Just so we have the facts straight, today we are considering a bill
that will immediately lift a twenty-five year moratorium on offshore
drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf. This is the same twenty-five
year moratorium that the House overwhelmingly voted in favor of
continuing just a couple of weeks ago when we considered the Fiscal
Year 2007 Interior Appropriations. The major difference between the two
votes is that the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act will give states an
``opt out'' option.
The so-called ``opt out'' option is alarming to me, because in truth,
it is anything but giving states the authority to control what happens
off their own coasts. In fact, what this bill does is first cut the
moratoria area by 100 miles from state boundaries (current law
establishes a boundary of 200 miles). Then the bill lifts the moratoria
on drilling between 50-100 miles off a state boundary. Yes, many of my
colleagues will assert that states then have the ability to ``opt out''
of offshore drilling leases. However, the complicated procedures
outlined in the bill will actually make it difficult for states to use
this ``opt out'' option and if they miss the deadline to file a
petition, drilling can start immediately. My question for my colleagues
who support this bill is: What happens if New Jersey is successful in
opting out of new leasing but New York and Delaware decide to allow
drilling. How can New Jersey coastal cities, businesses, and other
interested parties be sure that accidents in neighboring states will
not affect their industries?
Many of my colleagues today have talked at length about the costs of
this bill. An estimate initially done by the Minerals Management
Service (MMS) concluded that the bill would add $69 billion to the
federal budget deficit over the next fifteen years. CBO also estimates
that the bill will cost taxpayers $11 billion over the next ten years.
I would hope that many of my colleagues who care deeply about the
fiscal discipline of this Congress would see the hypocrisy in passing
this bill.
I am most concerned with the bill's direct contravention of the
National Environmental Policy Act provisions that promote
environmentally friendly practices. Section 12 of this bill says that
seismic air gun surveys and other exploratory leasing plans are exempt
from preparing an Environmental Impact Statement before drilling can
occur. The effects on our environment of seismic air gun surveys and
other exploratory plans are well documented. Large blasts and seismic
airgun arrays can cause severe damage to the hearing of many of the
ocean wildlife that depend on hearing for survival in addition to the
damage to the reefs and other ocean landscape. In 2004, the
International Whaling Commission's Scientific Committee concluded that
increased sound from seismic surveys was ``cause for serious concern.''
Allowing lease sales to be exempt from NEPA is misguided policy.
For all these reasons I have outlined above, I urge my colleagues to
vote against the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act. I have said this
before on the House floor and I believe it is worth saying again:
drilling is not the answer to our energy concerns and until we in
Congress work to promote energy conservation and sustainable energy
supplies, we will continue on the same treacherous path we are on
today.
Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I rise again today in strong support of
jobs and lower energy costs for the American people. The House is
considering the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006 that would
establish a common-sense framework to help America access more of its
vast energy resources in an environmentally safe manner. More access to
energy sources means more energy security for the American people, more
jobs for workers and less dependency on foreign sources of energy.
I strongly support H.R. 4761 and commend Representative Bobby Jindal
for his work on this important energy bill. I also want to thank
Chairman Pombo and Chairman Barton for their work on this issue and for
their leadership in helping bring this bill to the floor today.
The Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act will allow for expanded oil and
gas leasing off the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) by allowing the
Secretary of the Interior to offer new OCS areas for leasing that
presently are not open.
[[Page H4843]]
I urge my colleagues to join me in support of H.R. 4761. Support of
this bill is support for helping move us away from our dependency on
foreign sources of energy. The United States is currently more than 60
percent dependent on foreign sources of oil to meet our growing energy
demands. If we do not take steps to access more domestic sources of oil
and natural gas, we are placing ourselves at an economic disadvantage.
American's pay more for natural gas than any other country in the
world. The high cost of natural gas is not just an inconvenience, it is
costing American jobs.
My colleague from Pennsylvania, Representative John Peterson,
regularly notes that America is the only country in the world with a
moratorium on off-shore drilling for natural gas. While there are vast
amounts of this environmentally-clean energy source available in areas
far off our shorelines, opponents of lifting the moratorium are
standing in the way of lowering energy costs for our farmers, chemical
workers, small businesses and manufacturers.
Because Americans pay as much as 600 percent more for natural gas
than other countries, American businesses are often at a competitive
disadvantage when trying to compete with foreign businesses.
We all know our farmers depend upon natural gas for everything from
irrigation to food processing to nitrogen fertilizer production. When
the price of natural gas is high, that translates to more economic
hardship for rural America. And unlike most other businesses, farmers
are not able to pass along their increased input costs to consumers. It
simply means less income for them and the rural communities that depend
on a strong agriculture economy.
Natural gas prices account for most of the cost of fertilizers, which
means that as long as we refuse to open up more of our natural gas
reserves and lower the costs, farmers and rural farming communities
will continue to suffer.
In the past six years, 21 fertilizer plants in this country have
closed because they were no longer able to compete. This is just one
example of how high natural gas prices are closing businesses and
killing jobs. The longer we wait to lift the moratorium on offshore
drilling, the more jobs we lose.
Small businesses suffer when natural gas prices are high because they
have to spend more money for heating and cooling bills rather than
investments in new technologies or better wages for workers. Instead of
being able to sell their products and services for less, many
businesses are forced to raise their prices. In today's 21st century
economy, small businesses are often competing with foreign competitors,
not just the business down the street.
Manufacturing jobs are even more at risk for leaving if we do not
address the high cost of natural gas in this country. Over 100,000
chemical jobs have been lost over the past five years because of high
natural gas costs. These are jobs that we should not be forced to lose.
Americans deserve better than a continuation of an out-dated moratorium
on offshore drilling for natural gas and oil.
I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for H.R. 4761 and help
America compete by lowering energy costs, creating jobs and becoming
more energy self-sufficient.
Mr. MILLER of Florida. Mr. Chairman, right now our country is facing
an energy crisis. I believe that H.R. 4761 is a great first step to
freeing our country from the powerful grips of foreign energy reliance.
This bill also makes a powerful statement about the value we place on
our military by preventing drilling east of the Military Mission Line,
thus providing our military with the tools and resources it needs for
defense training.
Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld has said, areas east of the
military mission line are ``specially critical to DoD due to the number
and diversity of military testing and training activities conducted
there now, and those planned for the future.''
I want to thank Chairman Pombo and Congressman Young of Florida for
their strong support of this legislation and the military training area
that this bill will protect. Continuing to provide adequate training
facilities for our military shows not only support for our troops but
also sends a message to our enemies that we are serious about winning
this war and that our priorities are where they should be.
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to H.R.
4761, the Domestic Energy Production through Offshore Exploration Act.
This shortsighted initiative would feed America's oil addiction while
threatening our coasts and eliminating one of our few remaining sources
of fossil fuels.
Since President Bush declared that the nation is addicted to oil in
his State of the Union speech, the President and the Republican
Congress have continued to advance the agenda of their big oil buddies.
This legislation would ensure that the nation's increasing energy
demand is fed with oil instead of investing in alternative energy
sources and promoting efficiency. The United States holds only 2% of
the world's remaining oil reserves, while the Persian Gulf states have
60 percent of that oil. Feeding the nation's oil addiction is a threat
to the nation's security.
This legislation limits states' abilities to protect their
environment and their coastal residents. The energy companies already
have access to 80% of our offshore oil and gas reserves. This
legislation eliminates a 25-year, bi-partisan moratorium against
offshore drilling that protects beaches and sensitive coastal areas.
This bill makes it more difficult for states to prevent drilling off
their coasts than to allow it, and limits their power to prevent new
pipeline construction. It gives the Secretary of the Interior the
authority to threaten states with a loss of funding if they pass any
law that restricts drilling. In order to reward the oil and gas
industry, the Bush Administration and the Republican Congress will make
coastal states and their residents pay the price if we pass this
legislation.
This bill will not bring down gasoline prices in the near term or
ever. Given the average time it takes to produce oil and gas from new
wells offshore, no oil and gas would be brought to the market from
these new projects until 2013. We have the renewable energy capability
and the efficient technology to radically reduce our demand for oil and
gas today. By increasing fuel economy standards for passenger cars and
light trucks to 33 miles per gallon by 2015, we could eliminate our
imports of oil from the Persian Gulf. By spreading alternative fuels
and biofuels across the country, we could radically reduce the largest
source of our carbon emissions. And renewable energy sources like wind
farms could be brought online and produce electricity in as little time
as one year.
This bill will add tens of billions of dollars to our record deficit
by subsidizing the same oil and gas companies that are reporting record
profits. Already, every man, woman and child in this country bares the
burden of $30,000 of our current deficit. Now, this bill would allow
oil and gas companies to pay billions of dollars less in royalty
relief, compensates oil companies for any delays in their drilling
projects with taxpayer money, and allows the Congress to divert revenue
for new drilling projects. Oil companies should drill at their own
expense, not taxpayer expense, and the federal government should
vigilantly regulate all drilling projects.
I urge all members to oppose this budget-busting, polluting
legislation and encourage Congress to fight America's oil addiction
rather than feed it.
Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 4761 to
diversify our nation's domestic energy production. In the face of
volatile natural gas markets that are forcing our industries and jobs
overseas, we must begin drawing on the clean reliable fuel source that
lies far off our nations coasts while preserving states rights to
manage their nearshore waters.
For years I, along with many of my colleagues, have been calling for
a more clean alternative energy supplies for our nation and this bill
heeds that call. Our nation is currently generating half its
electricity by burning coal. In the midwest alone, we have an
astounding five-hundred individual coal burning power plants. According
to the department of energy, nearly half of these plants are burning
low grade, so called, sub-bituminous coal.
This enormous dependence on coal is not environmentally responsible.
In 2005, the United States produced more than 7 times more
CO2 from coal than from natural gas emits far fewer
particulates and climate changing gases compared to coal and is much
cleaner to produce domestically, yet our nation continues to rely on
coal. This bill will begin to reverse the longstnding habit.
Developing a domestic supply of natural gas is also critical to the
industries that produce the jobs and products our nation needs. The
volatility in the gas market makes it difficult for our companies to
compete which drives job losses, a sting we have felt in my district in
western Wisconsin. We can bring stability to these markets through
domestic gas production and keep those middle-class jobs at home where
they belong.
Our nation still needs a comprehensive energy policy and this bill is
only a small piece of what must eventually be a 21st century strategy
for clean domestic energy from a variety of sources. We must replace
middle east oil with midwest grain and other `home grown' alternatives
and that includes the clean natural gas that would be produced under
this bill. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 4761.
Mr. BOREN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to join my colleagues in
support of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act.
I support this act for a multitude of reasons; however, I want to
briefly talk about how this legislation is important to non-coastal
states like mine.
Mr. Chairman, many people may question why a piece of legislation
that opens the Outer
[[Page H4844]]
Continental Shelf should matter to states like Oklahoma.
Well, I am here to say that it is vitally important. It's important
to the farmers of America's Heartland.
This bill will bring relief to the farmers who have seen their costs
for fuel and crop inputs rise significantly over the last several years
by increasing natural gas supplies.
The farmers and ranchers of America know all too well that natural
gas is an important feedstock for the nitrogen fertilizers that are
used on virtually every crop produced in this country.
Mr. Chairman, we can even take the farmers out of the equation and
this legislation is still important to our nation.
Producing more natural gas will mean that we can reduce the cost of
utilities for the nation's working families.
Finally, I want to call attention to the fact that natural gas is a
clean source of energy. It is clean from its utilization as a fuel to
the processes that are used produce it. In recent years, the
technologies in the industry have dramatically improved leaving us with
everything from cleaner diesel fuel to smaller footprints after
drilling has ceased.
Mr. Chairman, this is our chance to help lower costs, create jobs,
and even increase production of an environmentally-friendly domestic
fuel source.
For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to support H.R 4761.
Mr. HERGER. Mr. Chairman, if gasoline prices are bad, natural gas
prices are even worse. The price of this fuel has tripled over the last
six years. This dramatic increase is hurting my constituents in
Northern California who rely on natural gas for heating and lighting.
Farmers who use natural gas for crop drying, irrigation, and fertilizer
production are also getting squeezed. Yet while prices climb to record
levels, Washington has essentially made it impossible for states to
provide any relief.
H.R. 4761 changes that. This bipartisan compromise gives the states
the power to decide how to utilize America's ocean energy resources.
It's a common sense plan for affordable energy, new jobs, and
environmental protection. I commend Chairman Pombo and urge my
colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, regrettably, I rise in opposition to this
legislation. I say regrettably because I really would like to support
increased domestic production of hydrocarbons. Like all my other
colleagues, over this past winter, my office was inundated with pleas
for help from constituents with through-the-roof home heating bills.
Unfortunately, I expect the same next winter.
You see, Mr. Chairman, I just fundamentally believe that the waters
we are talking about are federal waters. And that the revenue from
leasing activities should go to the Federal Treasury for the betterment
of the Nation. While I might agree to sharing some of the revenue with
the states, I simply cannot in good conscience support giving them 50
to 75 percent--or as is in the manager's amendment 42.5 percent to 75
percent. These revenues go to funding some of our most important
programs throughout the country, including in my home state of
Michigan. The Minerals Management Services estimated, prior to the
manager's amendment, that this revenue sharing will cost the Federal
Treasury $69 billion over the next 15 years. While the new period over
which this is phased in has lengthened, the net cost is still much the
same. In this era of ever increasing deficits, we simply cannot afford
to lose that revenue.
As the author of the National Environmental Policy Act, I am also
troubled by a provision that would exempt leases sales from the
analysis and public process required by NEPA.
In short, Mr. Chairman, I would like to see more energy production in
the Outer Continental Shelf. However, there is a right way and a wrong
way to achieve this. Unfortunately, the bill we are considering today
is the wrong way.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Chairman, my friends, I rise in support of H.R.
4761, the Domestic Energy Production Through Offshore Exploration Act
of 2006.
In 1981, Congress enacted a ban on energy exploration covering more
than 85 percent of the U.S. outer continental shelf. At the time, U.S.
natural gas prices were the lowest in the industrialized world.
Today, U.S. Natural gas prices are the highest in the industrialized
world. Prices for natural gas continue to increase, while the
government continues to promote new natural gas consumption.
To balance the market, we need to invest in efficient, alternative
energy. Additionally, we need to increase access to new energy supply
sources, like ethanol and hydrogen, to keep pace with new and growing
demands.
The high cost of natural gas and oil has a major impact on both the
farm and forest sectors.
Paper mills, a major employer in my district, are very energy
intensive. Energy costs account for 18 percent of the cost of operating
a mill, almost eclipsing costs for employee compensation. The effects
of higher energy prices have been dramatic. Over 232 paper mills have
closed and 182,000 jobs lost since 2000 when energy prices started
their steep ascent.
For farmers, higher natural gas prices mean higher costs for
fertilizers. According to the USDA, average fertilizer prices in March
2006 stood 74 percent higher than the 1990-92 levels, nearly
approaching all-time records. The high cost of oil has also greatly
effected farmers and ranchers. Unlike many businesses, farmers and
ranchers cannot pass on the extra costs to their customers and must
absorb rising costs themselves.
H.R. 4761 addresses the supply piece of the puzzle to help bring
natural gas and oil prices down. We can no longer continue to ban
access to large sources of supply, while we continue to encourage
innovation and advancement in all areas of industry, education, and
technology.
This bill allows the Federal government to begin the process of
developing these important resources throughout the outer continental
shelf.
The bill's provisions are essential to ensuring a more cost efficient
source of natural gas and oil. The benefits of efficient and cost-
effective energy are not limited to one single industry, but extend to
businesses, farmers, consumers, and communities. We find ourselves for
the first time in a quarter century acknowledging that we as a Congress
can no longer continue to promote natural gas and oil consumption and,
at the same time, prohibit more production. I urge my colleagues to
vote. ``yes'' on H.R. 4761.
Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the bill
and thank you for working with Members of Florida's Congressional
delegation to try and address our concerns. The residents of Florida
and much of the Nation are facing significant increases in energy
costs--gas to electricity bills--due to the increases in global demand
and our Nation's increasing reliance on foreign sources of energy. Yet
for Florida, our beaches are important for tourism and it is important
that we offer some protections along our coast. I believe the bill
before us reaches a good balance. It offers good protections while
enabling responsible exploration for natural gas and oil.
Mr. Chairman, if we in this body and as a Nation are really serious
about energy independence and its related national security
implications, we must allow greater drilling for natural gas and oil in
our Outer Continental Shelf. To do otherwise is to deny reality and
live in a dream world. This bill takes a significant step to reduce our
reliance on foreign oil and natural gas.
Some have made baseless claims that allowing natural gas wells or oil
wells within the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) will do little to
address the energy costs in the United States. This claim simply is not
based on sound economics. Over the past decade both in the state of
Florida and across the Nation, there has been a dramatic increase in
the use of natural gas for electric power generation. This switch was a
quick and cost-effective way for power companies to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions. According to a 2005 report from the Florida Public
Service Commission (FPSC), in 2003, 26 percent of Florida's electric
power was generated using natural gas. By 2013, just 7 years from now,
the FPSC projects that over 50 percent of Florida's electric power will
be generated using natural gas. The U.S. already pays the highest price
in the world for natural gas, and it will only rise further if we fail
to tap our own natural gas resources along the OCS.
Yet today we are increasingly importing natural gas from not only
Canada and Mexico, but Trinidad, Qatar, Nigeria, Oman, Egypt, and
Algeria. This increasing reliance on natural gas from Middle Eastern or
unstable countries will further threaten our Nation's economic vitality
and energy independence. This is the wrong path, particularly when we
have untapped natural gas along our Nation's Outer Continental Shelf.
The U.S. Department of Energy reports that the cost of natural gas
for electric power generation increased 300 percent between 2000 and
2005. Absent a new, larger and reliable supply of reasonably priced
natural gas, Florida residents--many of them senior citizens on fixed
incomes--will face dramatic increases in monthly power bills over the
next 7 years. Passage of the bill before, us will enable Florida to
secure a long-term supply of natural gas and help keep power bills in
check.
The bill before us allows drilling for oil and natural gas 100 miles
or more offshore. Between 50 and 100 miles the state legislature is
given 1 year to withdraw this area from natural gas wells and 3 years
to withdraw this area from oil wells. The coastal areas between the
shoreline out 50 miles are presumed to be under moratorium unless the
state legislature specifically authorizes either natural gas wells or
oil drilling within that area. The bill also provides for some revenue
sharing with the states
[[Page H4845]]
that permit natural gas and oil recovery, allowing billions of dollars
to be shared with the states to meet participating states' needs.
I trust the state legislature and the Governor of Florida to make the
right decisions about our coastlines and potential natural gas and oil
exploration. That is what this bill does. It ensures that the state
elected officials . . .
Finally, to those, particularly in Florida who would say we should
reject this legislation, I think it is important to consider the
sizable shift in recent votes the House and Senate have had on the
issue of off-shore drilling. When one considers the shift of 76 votes
between the vote we held on this issue last year and the vote held last
month, this bill before us today is likely the best deal Florida is
going to get. A year ago, Senators Nelson and Martinez could muster
only 44 votes in their attempt to strip off-shore drilling out of the
energy bill. I'm sure that, as in the House, there is a growing
consensus in the Senate to allow drilling in our Nation's Outer
Continental Shelf, including Florida's coast.
It is also important to note that there are currently areas off of
Florida's East coast that have less protection than what is offered in
this bill. Those areas will receive greater protection under this bill
that they have under current law.
Finally, I would say that Cuba and China are proposing a joint
venture to drill for gas of the northern coast of Cuba--45 miles from
the Florida shoreline. To stand idly by and watch the Communist Cuban
government and China drill within 45 miles of Florida's coast--perhaps
extracting gas that is in U.S. territorial waters--is absurd.
Given the realities of our needs, the national security concerns
associated with continued reliance on Middle Eastern oil and
legislative realities, I believe it is important that we move forward
with this bill today.
Let's vote for the underlying bill.
Mr. POE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Deep Ocean
Energy Resources (DOER) Act, H.R. 4761.
The United States must be more self-sufficient when it comes to
energy. The United States imports 60 percent of its crude oil from
foreign countries even though there are large quantities of oil and
natural gas available in the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). However,
these valuable resources are wrapped up in red tape and are off-limits
to energy exploration. The United States is the only developed nation
that limits access to their own natural resources. Other nations are
willing to drill close to their own shores. Canada drills in the Great
Lakes. Ireland, Norway, United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand all
drill within 50 miles of their own coastline. The Netherlands drills 20
miles off their shoes and Scotland drills 10 miles off their coast.
One part of the OCS, the Gulf of Mexico, is responsible for one-third
of the domestic oil production and 20 percent of the domestic natural
gas production. However, as we saw from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita,
these areas can be subject to supply disruption. It is imperative that
the United States begin drilling in other parts outside of the Gulf.
There is a wide range of areas where we can drill. While the United
States drills off my home State of Texas and Louisiana; there is crude
oil still available in the eastern parts of the Gulf of Mexico, on the
east coast and, yes, even off the sacred coast of California. It is
vital that we think and consider drilling in these areas.
Since the 1980s, Congress has been placing appropriations moratoriums
on drilling in about 90 percent of the Outer Continental Shelf placing
them off limit to any energy development. All the people in non-
drilling coastal States want cheap gasoline and natural gas, but they
do not drill in their neighborhood. They want Texas and Louisiana to
keep drilling in our neighborhood. We cannot have it both ways; cheap
gasoline and refuse to drill offshore. We must do everything in our
power to expand energy exploration in the OCS.
Limiting our ability to explore for energy is hypocritical. It does
not make sense. In this Outer Continental Shelf, there are about 300
trillion cubic feet of natural gas and more than 50 billion barrels of
oil yet to be discovered, that is enough oil or natural gas to: replace
current imports from the Persian Gulf for 60 years and produce
sufficient natural gas to heat 75 million homes for 60 years; produce
gasoline for 116 million cars and heating oil for 47 million homes for
15 years; produce sufficient natural gas to heat 75 million homes for
60 years.
The DOER Act is an important bill as it grants states the power to
control the OCS area off their coasts and still allow energy
exploration. States will now have the ability to control drilling
rights up to 100 miles off their coast. Current law only gives them
authority up to 3 miles. Additionally, the DOER Act will allow states
to share in the leasing royalties that occur in those areas that States
now control.
This will help to encourage more states to participate in energy
exploration as they will now share in the benefits from leasing rights.
For my State of Texas, we have long held the belief that drilling can
be done in a responsible and environmentally safe way. Now, Texas will
be able to share in those leasing royalties that in the past have been
exclusively limited to the federal government. These funds can be used
by Texas to offset the cost of Rita, fund education for Katrina
refugees or other important programs for the State.
It is for these reasons that I support and am a proud cosponsor for
H.R. 4761. If we want to reduce energy prices, we need to explore for
energy. This is a good bill that will allow for further exploration and
reward states that allow for that exploration. I encourage my
colleagues to support this important piece of legislation.
The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. LaHood). All time for general debate has
expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the amendment in the nature of a substitute
printed in the bill shall be considered as an original bill for the
purpose of amendment under the 5-minute rule and shall be considered
read.
The text of the amendment in the nature of a substitute is as
follows:
H.R. 4761
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Deep Ocean Energy Resources
Act of 2006''.
SEC. 2. POLICY.
It is the policy of the United States that--
(1) the United States is blessed with abundant energy
resources on the outer Continental Shelf and has developed a
comprehensive framework of environmental laws and regulations
and fostered the development of state-of-the-art technology
that allows for the responsible development of these
resources for the benefit of its citizenry;
(2) adjacent States are required by the circumstances to
commit significant resources in support of exploration,
development, and production activities for mineral resources
on the outer Continental Shelf, and it is fair and proper for
a portion of the receipts from such activities to be shared
with Adjacent States and their local coastal governments;
(3) the existing laws governing the leasing and production
of the mineral resources of the outer Continental Shelf have
reduced the production of mineral resources, have preempted
Adjacent States from being sufficiently involved in the
decisions regarding the allowance of mineral resource
development, and have been harmful to the national interest;
(4) the national interest is served by granting the
Adjacent States more options related to whether or not
mineral leasing should occur in the outer Continental Shelf
within their Adjacent Zones;
(5) it is not reasonably foreseeable that exploration of a
leased tract located more than 25 miles seaward of the
coastline, development and production of a natural gas
discovery located more than 25 miles seaward of the
coastline, or development and production of an oil discovery
located more than 50 miles seaward of the coastline will
adversely affect resources near the coastline;
(6) transportation of oil from a leased tract might
reasonably be foreseen, under limited circumstances, to have
the potential to adversely affect resources near the
coastline if the oil is within 50 miles of the coastline, but
such potential to adversely affect such resources is likely
no greater, and probably less, than the potential impacts
from tanker transportation because tanker spills usually
involve large releases of oil over a brief period of time;
and
(7) among other bodies of inland waters, the Great Lakes,
Long Island Sound, Delaware Bay, Chesapeake Bay, Albemarle
Sound, San Francisco Bay, and Puget Sound are not part of the
outer Continental Shelf, and are not subject to leasing by
the Federal Government for the exploration, development, and
production of any mineral resources that might lie beneath
them.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS UNDER THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF LANDS
ACT.
Section 2 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1331) is amended--
(1) by amending paragraph (f) to read as follows:
``(f) The term `affected State' means the Adjacent
State.'';
(2) by striking the semicolon at the end of each of
paragraphs (a) through (o) and inserting a period;
(3) by striking ``; and'' at the end of paragraph (p) and
inserting a period;
(4) by adding at the end the following:
``(r) The term `Adjacent State' means, with respect to any
program, plan, lease sale, leased tract or other activity,
proposed, conducted, or approved pursuant to the provisions
of this Act, any State the laws of which are declared,
pursuant to section 4(a)(2), to be the law of the United
States for the portion of the outer Continental Shelf on
which such program, plan, lease sale, leased tract or
activity appertains or is, or is proposed to be, conducted.
For purposes of this paragraph, the term `State' includes
Puerto Rico and the other Territories of the United States.
``(s) The term `Adjacent Zone' means, with respect to any
program, plan, lease sale, leased tract, or other activity,
proposed, conducted, or approved pursuant to the provisions
of this Act, the portion of the outer Continental Shelf for
which the laws of a particular Adjacent State are declared,
pursuant to section 4(a)(2), to be the law of the United
States.
[[Page H4846]]
``(t) The term `miles' means statute miles.
``(u) The term `coastline' has the same meaning as the term
`coast line' as defined in section 2(c) of the Submerged
Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1301(c)).
``(v) The term `Neighboring State' means a coastal State
having a common boundary at the coastline with the Adjacent
State.''; and
(5) in paragraph (a), by inserting after ``control'' the
following: ``or lying within the United States exclusive
economic zone adjacent to the Territories of the United
States''.
SEC. 4. DETERMINATION OF ADJACENT ZONES AND PLANNING AREAS.
Section 4(a)(2)(A) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act
(43 U.S.C. 1333(a)(2)(A)) is amended in the first sentence by
striking ``, and the President'' and all that follows through
the end of the sentence and inserting the following: ``. The
lines extending seaward and defining each State's Adjacent
Zone, and each OCS Planning Area, are as indicated on the
maps for each outer Continental Shelf region entitled `Alaska
OCS Region State Adjacent Zone and OCS Planning Areas',
`Pacific OCS Region State Adjacent Zones and OCS Planning
Areas', `Gulf of Mexico OCS Region State Adjacent Zones and
OCS Planning Areas', and `Atlantic OCS Region State Adjacent
Zones and OCS Planning Areas', all of which are dated
September 2005 and on file in the Office of the Director,
Minerals Management Service.''.
SEC. 5. ADMINISTRATION OF LEASING.
Section 5 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1334) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(k) Voluntary Partial Relinquishment of a Lease.--Any
lessee of a producing lease may relinquish to the Secretary
any portion of a lease that the lessee has no interest in
producing and that the Secretary finds is geologically
prospective. In return for any such relinquishment, the
Secretary shall provide to the lessee a royalty incentive for
the portion of the lease retained by the lessee, in
accordance with regulations promulgated by the Secretary to
carry out this subsection. The Secretary shall publish final
regulations implementing this subsection within 365 days
after the date of the enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy
Resources Act of 2006.
``(l) Natural Gas Lease Regulations.--Not later than July
1, 2007, the Secretary shall publish a final regulation that
shall--
``(1) establish procedures for entering into natural gas
leases;
``(2) ensure that natural gas leases are only available for
tracts on the outer Continental Shelf that are wholly within
100 miles of the coastline within an area withdrawn from
disposition by leasing on the day after the date of enactment
of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006;
``(3) provide that natural gas leases shall contain the
same rights and obligations established for oil and gas
leases, except as otherwise provided in the Deep Ocean Energy
Resources Act of 2006;
``(4) provide that, in reviewing the adequacy of bids for
natural gas leases, the value of any crude oil estimated to
be contained within any tract shall be excluded;
``(5) provide that any crude oil produced from a well and
reinjected into the leased tract shall not be subject to
payment of royalty, and that the Secretary shall consider, in
setting the royalty rates for a natural gas lease, the
additional cost to the lessee of not producing any crude oil;
and
``(6) provide that any Federal law that applies to an oil
and gas lease on the outer Continental Shelf shall apply to a
natural gas lease unless otherwise clearly inapplicable.''.
SEC. 6. GRANT OF LEASES BY SECRETARY.
Section 8 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1337) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(1) by inserting after the first
sentence the following: ``Further, the Secretary may grant
natural gas leases in a manner similar to the granting of oil
and gas leases and under the various bidding systems
available for oil and gas leases.'';
(2) by adding at the end of subsection (b) the following:
``The Secretary may issue more than one lease for a given
tract if each lease applies to a separate and distinct range
of vertical depths, horizontal surface area, or a combination
of the two. The Secretary may issue regulations that the
Secretary determines are necessary to manage such leases
consistent with the purposes of this Act.'';
(3) by amending subsection (p)(2)(B) to read as follows:
``(B) The Secretary shall provide for the payment to
coastal states, and their local coastal governments, of 75
percent of Federal receipts from projects authorized under
this section located partially or completely within the area
extending seaward of State submerged lands out to 4 marine
leagues from the coastline, and the payment to coastal states
of 50 percent of the receipts from projects completely
located in the area more than 4 marine leagues from the
coastline. Payments shall be based on a formula established
by the Secretary by rulemaking no later than 180 days after
the date of the enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources
Act of 2006 that provides for equitable distribution, based
on proximity to the project, among coastal states that have
coastline that is located within 200 miles of the geographic
center of the project.''.
(4) by adding at the end the following:
``(q) Natural Gas Leases.--
``(1) Right to produce natural gas.--A lessee of a natural
gas lease shall have the right to produce the natural gas
from a field on a natural gas leased tract if the Secretary
estimates that the discovered field has at least 40 percent
of the economically recoverable Btu content of the field
contained within natural gas and such natural gas is
economical to produce.
``(2) Crude oil.--A lessee of a natural gas lease may not
produce crude oil from the lease.
``(3) Estimates of btu content.--The Secretary shall make
estimates of the natural gas Btu content of discovered fields
on a natural gas lease only after the completion of at least
one exploration well, the data from which has been tied to
the results of a three-dimensional seismic survey of the
field. The Secretary may not require the lessee to further
delineate any discovered field prior to making such
estimates.
``(4) Definition of natural gas.--For purposes of a natural
gas lease, natural gas means natural gas and all substances
produced in association with gas, including, but not limited
to, hydrocarbon liquids (other than crude oil) that are
obtained by the condensation of hydrocarbon vapors and
separate out in liquid form from the produced gas stream.
``(r) Removal of Restrictions on Joint Bidding in Certain
Areas of the Outer Continental Shelf.--Restrictions on joint
bidders shall no longer apply to tracts located in the Alaska
OCS Region. Such restrictions shall not apply to tracts in
other OCS regions determined to be `frontier tracts' or
otherwise `high cost tracts' under final regulations that
shall be published by the Secretary by not later than 365
days after the date of the enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy
Resources Act of 2006.
``(s) Royalty Suspension Provisions.--The Secretary shall
agree to a request by any lessee to amend any lease issued
for Central and Western Gulf of Mexico tracts during the
period of December 1, 1995, through December 31, 2000, to
incorporate price thresholds applicable to royalty suspension
provisions, or amend existing price thresholds, in the amount
of $40.50 per barrel (2006 dollars) for oil and for natural
gas of $6.75 per million Btu (2006 dollars). Any amended
lease shall impose the new or revised price thresholds
effective October 1, 2005. Existing lease provisions shall
prevail through September 30, 2005. After the date of the
enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006,
price thresholds shall apply to any royalty suspension
volumes granted by the Secretary. Unless otherwise set by
Secretary by regulation or for a particular lease sale, the
price thresholds shall be $40.50 for oil (2006 dollars) and
$6.75 for natural gas (2006 dollars).
``(t) Royalty Rate for Oil and Gas or Natural Gas Leases on
the Outer Continental Shelf.--After the date of the enactment
of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006, the base
royalty rate for new oil and gas or natural gas leases on the
outer Continental Shelf shall be the same for all leased
tracts.
``(u) Conservation of Resources Fees.--
``(1) Not later than one year after the date of the
enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006, the
Secretary by regulation shall establish a conservation of
resources fee for producing leases that will apply to new and
existing leases which shall be set at $9 per barrel for oil
and $1.25 per million Btu for gas. This fee shall only apply
to leases in production located in more than 200 meters of
water for which royalties are not being paid when prices
exceed $40.50 per barrel for oil and $6.75 per million Btu
for natural gas in 2006, dollars. This fee shall apply to
production from and after October 1, 2005, and shall be
treated as offsetting receipts.
``(2) Not later than one year after the date of the
enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006, the
Secretary by regulation shall establish a conservation of
resources fee for nonproducing leases that will apply to new
and existing leases which shall be set at not less than $1.00
nor more than $4.00 per acre per year. This fee shall apply
from and after October 1, 2005, and shall be treated as
offsetting receipts.'';
(5) by striking subsection (a)(3)(A) and redesignating the
subsequent subparagraphs as subparagraphs (A) and (B),
respectively;
(6) in subsection (a)(3)(A) (as so redesignated) by
striking ``In the Western'' and all that follows through
``the Secretary'' the first place it appears and inserting
``The Secretary''; and
(7) effective October 1, 2006, in subsection (g)--
(A) by striking all after ``(g)'', except paragraph (3);
(B) by striking the last sentence of paragraph (3); and
(C) by striking ``(3)''.
SEC. 7. DISPOSITION OF RECEIPTS.
Section 9 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1338) is amended--
(1) by designating the existing text as subsection (a);
(2) in subsection (a) (as so designated) by inserting ``,
if not paid as otherwise provided in this title'' after
``receipts''; and
(3) by adding the following:
``(b) Treatment of OCS Receipts From Tracts Completely
Within 100 Miles of the Coastline.--
``(1) Deposit.--The Secretary shall deposit into a separate
account in the Treasury the portion of OCS Receipts for each
fiscal year that will be shared under paragraphs (2), (3),
and (4).
``(2) Phased-in receipts sharing.--
``(A) Beginning October 1, 2005, the Secretary shall share
OCS Receipts derived from the following areas:
``(i) Lease tracts located on portions of the Gulf of
Mexico OCS Region completely beyond 4 marine leagues from any
coastline and completely within 100 miles of any coastline
that are available for leasing under the 2002-2007 5-Year Oil
and Gas Leasing Program in effect prior to the date of the
enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006.
``(ii) Lease tracts in production prior to October 1, 2005,
completely beyond 4 marine leagues from any coastline and
completely within 100 miles of any coastline located on
portions of the
[[Page H4847]]
OCS that were not available for leasing under the 2002-2007
5-Year OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Program in effect prior to the
date of the enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act
of 2006.
``(iii) Lease tracts for which leases are issued prior to
October 1, 2005, located in the Alaska OCS Region completely
beyond 4 marine leagues from any coastline and completely
within 100 miles of the coastline.
``(B) The Secretary shall share the following percentages
of OCS Receipts from the leases described in subparagraph (A)
derived during the fiscal year indicated:
``(i) For fiscal year 2006, 6.0 percent.
``(ii) For fiscal year 2007, 7.0 percent.
``(iii) For fiscal year 2008, 8.0 percent.
``(iv) For fiscal year 2009, 9.0 percent.
``(v) For fiscal year 2010, 12.0 percent.
``(vi) For fiscal year 2011, 15.0 percent.
``(vii) For fiscal year 2012, 18.0 percent.
``(viii) For fiscal year 2013, 21.0 percent.
``(ix) For fiscal year 2014, 24.0 percent.
``(x) For fiscal year 2015, 27.0 percent.
``(xi) For fiscal year 2016, 30.0 percent.
``(xii) For fiscal year 2017, 33.0 percent.
``(xiii) For fiscal year 2018, 36.0 percent.
``(xiv) For fiscal year 2019, 39.0 percent.
``(xv) For fiscal year 2020, 42.0 percent.
``(xvi) For fiscal year 2021, 45.0 percent.
``(xvii) For fiscal year 2022 and each subsequent fiscal
year, 50.0 percent.
``(C) The provisions of this paragraph shall not apply to
leases that could not have been issued but for section 5(k)
of this Act or section 6(2) of the Deep Ocean Energy
Resources Act of 2006.
``(3) Immediate receipts sharing.--Beginning October 1,
2005, the Secretary shall share 50 percent of OCS Receipts
derived from all leases located completely beyond 4 marine
leagues from any coastline and completely within 100 miles of
any coastline not included within the provisions of paragraph
(2).
``(4) Receipts sharing from tracts within 4 marine leagues
of any coastline.--Beginning October 1, 2005, the Secretary
shall share 75 percent of OCS Receipts derived from all
leases located completely or partially within 4 marine
leagues from any coastline.
``(5) Allocations.--The Secretary shall allocate the OCS
Receipts deposited into the separate account established by
paragraph (1) that are shared under paragraphs (2), (3), and
(4) as follows:
``(A) Bonus bids.--Deposits derived from bonus bids from a
leased tract, including interest thereon, shall be allocated
at the end of each fiscal year as follows:
``(i) 85 percent to the Adjacent State.
``(ii) 5 percent into the Treasury, which shall be
allocated to the account established by section 14 of the
Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006.
``(iii) 5 percent into the account established by section
23 of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006.
``(iv) 5 percent into the account established by section 26
of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006.
``(B) Royalties.--Deposits derived from royalties from a
leased tract, including interest thereon, shall be allocated
at the end of each fiscal year as follows:
``(i) 85 percent to the Adjacent State and any other
producing State or States with a leased tract within its
Adjacent Zone within 100 miles of its coastline that
generated royalties during the fiscal year, if the other
producing or States have a coastline point within 300 miles
of any portion of the leased tract, in which case the amount
allocated for the leased tract shall be--
``(I) one-third to the Adjacent State; and
``(II) two-thirds to each producing State, including the
Adjacent State, inversely proportional to the distance
between the nearest point on the coastline of the producing
State and the geographic center of the leased tract.
``(ii) 5 percent into the Treasury, which shall be
allocated to the account established by section 14 of the
Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006.
``(iii) 5 percent into the account established by section
23 of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006.
``(iv) 5 percent into the account established by section 26
of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006.
``(c) Treatment of OCS Receipts From Tracts Partially or
Completely Beyond 100 Miles of the Coastline.--
``(1) Deposit.--The Secretary shall deposit into a separate
account in the Treasury the portion of OCS Receipts for each
fiscal year that will be shared under paragraphs (2) and (3).
``(2) Phased-in receipts sharing.--
``(A) Beginning October 1, 2005, the Secretary shall share
OCS Receipts derived from the following areas:
``(i) Lease tracts located on portions of the Gulf of
Mexico OCS Region partially or completely beyond 100 miles of
any coastline that were available for leasing under the 2002-
2007 5-Year Oil and Gas Leasing Program in effect prior to
the date of enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act
of 2006.
``(ii) Lease tracts in production prior to October 1, 2005,
partially or completely beyond 100 miles of any coastline
located on portions of the OCS that were not available for
leasing under the 2002-2007 5-Year OCS Oil and Gas Leasing
Program in effect prior to the date of enactment of the Deep
Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006.
``(iii) Lease tracts for which leases are issued prior to
October 1, 2005, located in the Alaska OCS Region partially
or completely beyond 100 miles of the coastline.
``(B) The Secretary shall share the following percentages
of OCS Receipts from the leases described in subparagraph (A)
derived during the fiscal year indicated:
``(i) For fiscal year 2006, 6.0 percent.
``(ii) For fiscal year 2007, 7.0 percent.
``(iii) For fiscal year 2008, 8.0 percent.
``(iv) For fiscal year 2009, 9.0 percent.
``(v) For fiscal year 2010, 12.0 percent.
``(vi) For fiscal year 2011, 15.0 percent.
``(vii) For fiscal year 2012, 18.0 percent.
``(viii) For fiscal year 2013, 21.0 percent.
``(ix) For fiscal year 2014, 24.0 percent.
``(x) For fiscal year 2015, 27.0 percent.
``(xi) For fiscal year 2016, 30.0 percent.
``(xii) For fiscal year 2017, 33.0 percent.
``(xiii) For fiscal year 2018, 36.0 percent.
``(xiv) For fiscal year 2019, 39.0 percent.
``(xv) For fiscal year 2020, 42.0 percent.
``(xvi) For fiscal year 2021, 45.0 percent.
``(xvii) For fiscal year 2022 and each subsequent fiscal
year, 50.0 percent.
``(C) The provisions of this paragraph shall not apply to
leases that could not have been issued but for section 5(k)
of this Act or section 6(2) of the Deep Ocean Energy
Resources Act of 2006.
``(3) Immediate receipts sharing.--Beginning October 1,
2005, the Secretary shall share 50 percent of OCS Receipts
derived on and after October 1, 2005, from all leases located
partially or completely beyond 100 miles of any coastline not
included within the provisions of paragraph (2).
``(4) Allocations.--The Secretary shall allocate the OCS
Receipts deposited into the separate account established by
paragraph (1) that are shared under paragraphs (2) and (3) as
follows:
``(A) Bonus bids.--Deposits derived from bonus bids from a
leased tract, including interest thereon, shall be allocated
at the end of each fiscal year as follows:
``(i) 85 percent to the Adjacent State.
``(ii) 5 percent into the Treasury, which shall be
allocated to the account established by section 14 of the
Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006.
``(iii) 5 percent into the account established by section
23 of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006.
``(iv) 5 percent into the account established by section 26
of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006.
``(B) Royalties.--Deposits derived from royalties from a
leased tract, including interest thereon, shall be allocated
at the end of each fiscal year as follows:
``(i) 85 percent to the Adjacent State and any other
producing State or States with a leased tract within its
Adjacent Zone partially or completely beyond 100 miles of its
coastline that generated royalties during the fiscal year, if
the other producing State or States have a coastline point
within 300 miles of any portion of the leased tract, in which
case the amount allocated for the leased tract shall be--
``(I) one-third to the Adjacent State; and
``(II) two-thirds to each producing State, including the
Adjacent State, inversely proportional to the distance
between the nearest point on the coastline of the producing
State and the geographic center of the leased tract.
``(ii) 5 percent into the account established by section 14
of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006.
``(iii) 5 percent into the account established by section
23 of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006.
``(iv) 5 percent into the account established by section 26
of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006.
``(d) Transmission of Allocations.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the end of
each fiscal year, the Secretary shall transmit--
``(A) to each State 60 percent of such State's allocations
under subsections (b)(5)(A)(i), (b)(5)(B)(i), (c)(4)(A)(i),
and (c)(4)(B)(i) for the immediate prior fiscal year;
``(B) to coastal county-equivalent and municipal political
subdivisions of such State a total of 40 percent of such
State's allocations under subsections (b)(5)(A)(i),
(b)(5)(B)(i), (c)(4)(A)(i), and (c)(4)(B)(i), together with
all accrued interest thereon; and
``(C) the remaining allocations under subsections (b)(5)
and (c)(4), together with all accrued interest thereon.
``(2) Allocations to coastal county-equivalent political
subdivisions.--The Secretary shall make an initial allocation
of the OCS Receipts to be shared under paragraph (1)(B) as
follows:
``(A) 25 percent shall be allocated to coastal county-
equivalent political subdivisions that are completely more
than 25 miles landward of the coastline and at least a part
of which lies not more than 75 miles landward from the
coastline, with the allocation among such coastal county-
equivalent political subdivisions based on population.
``(B) 75 percent shall be allocated to coastal county-
equivalent political subdivisions that are completely or
partially less than 25 miles landward of the coastline, with
the allocation among such coastal county-equivalent political
subdivisions to be further allocated as follows:
``(i) 25 percent shall be allocated based on the ratio of
such coastal county-equivalent political subdivision's
population to the coastal population of all coastal county-
equivalent political subdivisions in the State.
``(ii) 25 percent shall be allocated based on the ratio of
such coastal county-equivalent political subdivision's
coastline miles to the coastline miles of all coastal county-
equivalent political subdivisions in the State as calculated
by the Secretary. In such calculations, coastal county-
equivalent political subdivisions without a coastline shall
be considered to have 50 percent of the average coastline
miles of the coastal county-equivalent political subdivisions
that do have coastlines.
``(iii) 25 percent shall be allocated to all coastal
county-equivalent political subdivisions having a coastline
point within 300 miles of the
[[Page H4848]]
leased tract for which OCS Receipts are being shared based on
a formula that allocates the funds based on such coastal
county-equivalent political subdivision's relative distance
from the leased tract.
``(iv) 25 percent shall be allocated to all coastal county-
equivalent political subdivisions having a coastline point
within 300 miles of the leased tract for which OCS Receipts
are being shared based on the relative level of outer
Continental Shelf oil and gas activities in a coastal
political subdivision compared to the level of outer
Continental Shelf activities in all coastal political
subdivisions in the State. The Secretary shall define the
term `outer Continental Shelf oil and gas activities' for
purposes of this subparagraph to include, but not be limited
to, construction of vessels, drillships, and platforms
involved in exploration, production, and development on the
outer Continental Shelf; support and supply bases, ports, and
related activities; offices of geologists, geophysicists,
engineers, and other professionals involved in support of
exploration, production, and development of oil and gas on
the outer Continental Shelf; pipelines and other means of
transporting oil and gas production from the outer
Continental Shelf; and processing and refining of oil and gas
production from the outer Continental Shelf. For purposes of
this subparagraph, if a coastal county-equivalent political
subdivision does not have a coastline, its coastal point
shall be the point on the coastline closest to it.
``(3) Allocations to coastal municipal political
subdivisions.--The initial allocation to each coastal county-
equivalent political subdivision under paragraph (2) shall be
further allocated to the coastal county-equivalent political
subdivision and any coastal municipal political subdivisions
located partially or wholly within the boundaries of the
coastal county-equivalent political subdivision as follows:
``(A) One-third shall be allocated to the coastal county-
equivalent political subdivision.
``(B) Two-thirds shall be allocated on a per capita basis
to the municipal political subdivisions and the county-
equivalent political subdivision, with the allocation to the
latter based upon its population not included within the
boundaries of a municipal political subdivision.
``(e) Investment of Deposits.--Amounts deposited under this
section shall be invested by the Secretary of the Treasury in
securities backed by the full faith and credit of the United
States having maturities suitable to the needs of the account
in which they are deposited and yielding the highest
reasonably available interest rates as determined by the
Secretary of the Treasury.
``(f) Use of Funds.--A recipient of funds under this
section may use the funds for one or more of the following:
``(1) To reduce in-State college tuition at public
institutions of higher learning and otherwise support public
education, including career technical education.
``(2) To make transportation infrastructure improvements.
``(3) To reduce taxes.
``(4) To promote, fund, and provide for--
``(A) coastal or environmental restoration;
``(B) fish, wildlife, and marine life habitat enhancement;
``(C) waterways construction and maintenance;
``(D) levee construction and maintenance and shore
protection; and
``(E) marine and oceanographic education and research.
``(5) To promote, fund, and provide for --
``(A) infrastructure associated with energy production
activities conducted on the outer Continental Shelf;
``(B) energy demonstration projects;
``(C) supporting infrastructure for shore-based energy
projects;
``(D) State geologic programs, including geologic mapping
and data storage programs, and state geophysical data
acquisition;
``(E) State seismic monitoring programs, including
operation of monitoring stations;
``(F) development of oil and gas resources through enhanced
recovery techniques;
``(G) alternative energy development, including bio fuels,
coal-to-liquids, oil shale, tar sands, geothermal,
geopressure, wind, waves, currents, hydro, and other
renewable energy;
``(H) energy efficiency and conservation programs; and
``(I) front-end engineering and design for facilities that
produce liquid fuels from hydrocarbons and other biological
matter.
``(6) To promote, fund, and provide for--
``(A) historic preservation programs and projects;
``(B) natural disaster planning and response; and,
``(C) hurricane and natural disaster insurance programs.
``(7) For any other purpose as determined by State law.
``(g) No Accounting Required.--No recipient of funds under
this section shall be required to account to the Federal
Government for the expenditure of such funds, except as
otherwise may be required by law. However, States may enact
legislation providing for accounting for and auditing of such
expenditures. Further, funds allocated under this section to
States and political subdivisions may be used as matching
funds for other Federal programs.
``(h) Effect of Future Laws.--Enactment of any future
Federal statute that has the effect, as determined by the
Secretary, of restricting any Federal agency from spending
appropriated funds, or otherwise preventing it from
fulfilling its pre-existing responsibilities as of the date
of enactment of the statute, unless such responsibilities
have been reassigned to another Federal agency by the statute
with no prevention of performance, to issue any permit or
other approval impacting on the OCS oil and gas leasing
program, or any lease issued thereunder, or to implement any
provision of this Act shall automatically prohibit any
sharing of OCS Receipts under this section directly with the
States, and their coastal political subdivisions, for the
duration of the restriction. The Secretary shall make the
determination of the existence of such restricting effects
within 30 days of a petition by any outer Continental Shelf
lessee or producing State.
``(i) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Coastal county-equivalent political subdivision.--The
term `coastal county-equivalent political subdivision' means
a political jurisdiction immediately below the level of State
government, including a county, parish, borough in Alaska,
independent municipality not part of a county, parish, or
borough in Alaska, or other equivalent subdivision of a
coastal State, that lies within the coastal zone.
``(2) Coastal municipal political subdivision.--The term
`coastal municipal political subdivision' means a
municipality located within and part of a county, parish,
borough in Alaska, or other equivalent subdivision of a
State, all or part of which coastal municipal political
subdivision lies within the coastal zone.
``(3) Coastal population.--The term `coastal population'
means the population of all coastal county-equivalent
political subdivisions, as determined by the most recent
official data of the Census Bureau.
``(4) Coastal zone.--The term `coastal zone' means that
portion of a coastal State, including the entire territory of
any coastal county-equivalent political subdivision at least
a part of which lies, within 75 miles landward from the
coastline, or a greater distance as determined by State law
enacted to implement this section.
``(5) Bonus bids.--The term `bonus bids' means all funds
received by the Secretary to issue an outer Continental Shelf
minerals lease.
``(6) Royalties.--The term `royalties' means all funds
received by the Secretary from production of oil or natural
gas, or the sale of production taken in-kind, from an outer
Continental Shelf minerals lease.
``(7) Producing state.--The term `producing State' means an
Adjacent State having an Adjacent Zone containing leased
tracts from which OCS Receipts were derived.
``(8) OCS receipts.--The term `OCS Receipts' means bonus
bids, royalties, and conservation of resources fees.''.
SEC. 8. REVIEW OF OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF EXPLORATION PLANS.
Subsections (c) and (d) of section 11 of the Outer
Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1340) are amended to
read as follows:
``(c) Plan Review; Plan Provisions.--
``(1) Except as otherwise provided in this Act, prior to
commencing exploration pursuant to any oil and gas lease
issued or maintained under this Act, the holder thereof shall
submit an exploration plan (hereinafter in this section
referred to as a `plan') to the Secretary for review which
shall include all information and documentation required
under paragraphs (2) and (3). The Secretary shall review the
plan for completeness within 10 days of submission. If the
Secretary finds that the plan is not complete, the Secretary
shall notify the lessee with a detailed explanation and
require such modifications of such plan as are necessary to
achieve completeness. The Secretary shall have 10 days to
review a modified plan for completeness. Such plan may apply
to more than one lease held by a lessee in any one region of
the outer Continental Shelf, or by a group of lessees acting
under a unitization, pooling, or drilling agreement, and the
lessee shall certify that such plan is consistent with the
terms of the lease and is consistent with all statutory and
regulatory requirements in effect on the date of issuance of
the lease, and any regulations promulgated under this Act to
the conservation of resources after the date of the lease
issuances. The Secretary shall have 30 days from the date the
plan is deemed complete to conduct a review of the plan. If
the Secretary finds the plan is not consistent with the lease
and all such statutory and regulatory requirements, the
Secretary shall notify the lessee with a detailed explanation
of such modifications of such plan as are necessary to
achieve compliance. The Secretary shall have 30 days to
review any modified plan submitted by the lessee. The lessee
shall not take any action under the exploration plan within
the 30-day review period, or thereafter until the plan has
been modified to achieve compliance as so notified.
``(2) An exploration plan submitted under this subsection
shall include, in the degree of detail which the Secretary
may by regulation require--
``(A) a schedule of anticipated exploration activities to
be undertaken;
``(B) a description of equipment to be used for such
activities;
``(C) the general location of each well to be drilled; and
``(D) such other information deemed pertinent by the
Secretary.
``(3) The Secretary may, by regulation, require that such
plan be accompanied by a general statement of development and
production intentions which shall be for planning purposes
only and which shall not be binding on any party.
``(d) Plan Revisions; Conduct of Exploration Activities.--
``(1) If a significant revision of an exploration plan
under this subsection is submitted to the Secretary, the
process to be used for the review of such revision shall be
the same as set forth in subsection (c) of this section.
``(2) All exploration activities pursuant to any lease
shall be conducted in accordance with an exploration plan or
a revised plan which has been submitted to and reviewed by
the Secretary.''.
SEC. 9. RESERVATION OF LANDS AND RIGHTS.
Section 12 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1341) is amended--
[[Page H4849]]
(1) in subsection (a) by adding at the end the following:
``The President may partially or completely revise or revoke
any prior withdrawal made by the President under the
authority of this section. The President may not revise or
revoke a withdrawal that was initiated by a petition from a
State and approved by the Secretary of the Interior under
subsection (h). A withdrawal by the President may be for a
term not to exceed 10 years. When considering potential uses
of the outer Continental Shelf, to the maximum extent
possible, the President shall accommodate competing interests
and potential uses.'';
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(g) Availability for Leasing Within Certain Areas of the
Outer Continental Shelf.--
``(1) Prohibition against leasing.--
``(A) Unavailable for leasing without state request.--
Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, from and
after enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of
2006, the Secretary shall not offer for leasing for oil and
gas, or natural gas, any area within 50 miles of the
coastline that was withdrawn from disposition by leasing in
the Atlantic OCS Region or the Pacific OCS Region, or the
Gulf of Mexico OCS Region Eastern Planning Area, as depicted
on the maps referred to in this subparagraph, under the
`Memorandum on Withdrawal of Certain Areas of the United
States Outer Continental Shelf from Leasing Disposition', 34
Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1111, dated June 12, 1998, or any
area within 50 miles of the coastline not withdrawn under
that Memorandum that is included within the Gulf of Mexico
OCS Region Eastern Planning Area as indicated on the map
entitled `Gulf of Mexico OCS Region State Adjacent Zones and
OCS Planning Areas' or the Florida Straits Planning Area as
indicated on the map entitled `Atlantic OCS Region State
Adjacent Zones and OCS Planning Areas', both of which are
dated September 2005 and on file in the Office of the
Director, Minerals Management Service.
``(B) Areas between 50 and 100 miles from the coastline.--
Unless an Adjacent State petitions under subsection (h)
within one year after the date of the enactment of the Deep
Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006 for natural gas leasing or
by June 30, 2009, for oil and gas leasing, the Secretary
shall offer for leasing any area more than 50 miles but less
than 100 miles from the coastline that was withdrawn from
disposition by leasing in the Atlantic OCS Region, the
Pacific OCS Region, or the Gulf of Mexico OCS Region Eastern
Planning Area, as depicted on the maps referred to in this
subparagraph, under the `Memorandum on Withdrawal of Certain
Areas of the United States Outer Continental Shelf from
Leasing Disposition', 34 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1111, dated
June 12, 1998, or any area more than 50 miles but less than
100 miles of the coastline not withdrawn under that
Memorandum that is included within the Gulf of Mexico OCS
Region Eastern Planning Area as indicated on the map entitled
`Gulf of Mexico OCS Region State Adjacent Zones and OCS
Planning Areas' or within the Florida Straits Planning Area
as indicated on the map entitled `Atlantic OCS Region State
Adjacent Zones and OCS Planning Areas', both of which are
dated September 2005 and on file in the Office of the
Director, Minerals Management Service.
``(2) Revocation of withdrawal.--The provisions of the
`Memorandum on Withdrawal of Certain Areas of the United
States Outer Continental Shelf from Leasing Disposition', 34
Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1111, dated June 12, 1998, are hereby
revoked and are no longer in effect regarding any areas that
are more than 100 miles from the coastline, nor for any areas
that are less than 100 miles from the coastline and are
included within the Gulf of Mexico OCS Region Central
Planning Area as depicted on the map entitled `Gulf of Mexico
OCS Region State Adjacent Zones and OCS Planning Areas' dated
September 2005 and on file in the Office of the Director,
Minerals Management Service. The 2002-2007 5-Year Outer
Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program is hereby
amended to include the areas added to the Gulf of Mexico OCS
Region Central Planning Area by this Act to the extent that
such areas were included within the original boundaries of
proposed Lease Sale 181. The amendment to such leasing
program includes a sale in such additional areas, which shall
be held no later than June 30, 2007. The Final Environmental
Impact Statement prepared for this area for Lease Sale 181
shall be deemed sufficient for all purposes for each lease
sale in which such area is offered for lease during the 2002-
2007 5-Year Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing
Program without need for supplementation. Any tract only
partially added to the Gulf of Mexico OCS Region Central
Planning Area by this Act shall be eligible for leasing of
the part of such tract that is included within the Gulf of
Mexico OCS Region Central Planning Area, and the remainder of
such tract that lies outside of the Gulf of Mexico OCS Region
Central Planning Area may be developed and produced by the
lessee of such partial tract using extended reach or similar
drilling from a location on a leased area. Further, any area
in the OCS withdrawn from leasing may be leased, and
thereafter developed and produced by the lessee using
extended reach or similar drilling from a location on a
leased area located in an area available for leasing.
``(3) Petition for leasing.--
``(A) In general.--The Governor of the State, upon
concurrence of its legislature, may submit to the Secretary a
petition requesting that the Secretary make available any
area that is within the State's Adjacent Zone, included
within the provisions of paragraph (1), and that (i) is
greater than 25 miles from any point on the coastline of a
Neighboring State for the conduct of offshore leasing, pre-
leasing, and related activities with respect to natural gas
leasing; or (ii) is greater than 50 miles from any point on
the coastline of a Neighboring State for the conduct of
offshore leasing, pre-leasing, and related activities with
respect to oil and gas leasing. The Adjacent State may also
petition for leasing any other area within its Adjacent Zone
if leasing is allowed in the similar area of the Adjacent
Zone of the applicable Neighboring State, or if not allowed,
if the Neighboring State, acting through its Governor,
expresses its concurrence with the petition. The Secretary
shall only consider such a petition upon making a finding
that leasing is allowed in the similar area of the Adjacent
Zone of the applicable Neighboring State or upon receipt of
the concurrence of the Neighboring State. The date of receipt
by the Secretary of such concurrence by the Neighboring State
shall constitute the date of receipt of the petition for that
area for which the concurrence applies. Except for any area
described in the last sentence of paragraph (2), a petition
for leasing any part of the Alabama Adjacent Zone that is a
part of the Gulf of Mexico Eastern Planning Area, as
indicated on the map entitled `Gulf of Mexico OCS Region
State Adjacent Zones and OCS Planning Areas' which is dated
September 2005 and on file in the Office of the Director,
Minerals Management Service, shall require the concurrence of
both Alabama and Florida.
``(B) Limitations on leasing.--In its petition, a State
with an Adjacent Zone that contains leased tracts may
condition new leasing for oil and gas, or natural gas for
tracts within 25 miles of the coastline by--
``(i) requiring a net reduction in the number of production
platforms;
``(ii) requiring a net increase in the average distance of
production platforms from the coastline;
``(iii) limiting permanent surface occupancy on new leases
to areas that are more than 10 miles from the coastline;
``(iv) limiting some tracts to being produced from shore or
from platforms located on other tracts; or
``(v) other conditions that the Adjacent State may deem
appropriate as long as the Secretary does not determine that
production is made economically or technically impracticable
or otherwise impossible.
``(C) Action by secretary.--Not later than 90 days after
receipt of a petition under subparagraph (A), the Secretary
shall approve the petition, unless the Secretary determines
that leasing the area would probably cause serious harm or
damage to the marine resources of the State's Adjacent Zone.
Prior to approving the petition, the Secretary shall complete
an environmental assessment that documents the anticipated
environmental effects of leasing in the area included within
the scope of the petition.
``(D) Failure to act.--If the Secretary fails to approve or
deny a petition in accordance with subparagraph (C) the
petition shall be considered to be approved 90 days after
receipt of the petition.
``(E) Amendment of the 5-year leasing program.--
Notwithstanding section 18, within 180 days of the approval
of a petition under subparagraph (C) or (D), after the
expiration of the time limits in paragraph (1)(B), and within
180 days after the enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy
Resources Act of 2006 for the areas made available for
leasing under paragraph (2), the Secretary shall amend the
current 5-Year Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing
Program to include a lease sale or sales for at least 75
percent of the associated areas, unless there are, from the
date of approval, expiration of such time limits, or
enactment, as applicable, fewer than 12 months remaining in
the current 5-Year Leasing Program in which case the
Secretary shall include the associated areas within lease
sales under the next 5-Year Leasing Program. For purposes of
amending the 5-Year Program in accordance with this section,
further consultations with States shall not be required. For
purposes of this section, an environmental assessment
performed under the provisions of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 to assess the effects of approving the
petition shall be sufficient to amend the 5-Year Leasing
Program.
``(h) Option to Petition for Extension of Withdrawal From
Leasing Within Certain Areas of the Outer Continental
Shelf.--
``(1) In general.--The Governor of the State, upon the
concurrence of its legislature, may submit to the Secretary
petitions requesting that the Secretary extend for a period
of time of up to 5 years for each petition the withdrawal
from leasing for all or part of any area within the State's
Adjacent Zone located more than 50 miles, but less than 100
miles, from the coastline that is subject to subsection
(g)(1)(B). A State may petition multiple times for any
particular area but not more than once per calendar year for
any particular area. A State must submit separate petitions,
with separate votes by its legislature, for oil and gas
leasing and for natural gas leasing. A petition of a State
may request some areas to be withdrawn from all leasing and
some areas to be withdrawn only from one type of leasing.
Petitions for extending the withdrawal from leasing of any
part of the Alabama Adjacent Zone that is more than 50 miles,
but less than 100 miles, from the coastline that is a part of
the Gulf of Mexico OCS Region Eastern Planning Area, as
indicated on the map entitled `Gulf of Mexico OCS Region
State Adjacent Zones and OCS Planning Areas' which is dated
September 2005 and on file in the Office of the Director,
Minerals Management Service, may be made by either Alabama or
Florida.
``(2) Action by secretary.--The Secretary shall perform an
environmental assessment under the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 to assess the effects of approving the
petition under paragraph (1). Not later than 90 days after
receipt of the petition, the Secretary shall
[[Page H4850]]
approve the petition, unless the Secretary determines that
extending the withdrawal from leasing would probably cause
serious harm or damage to the marine resources of the State's
Adjacent Zone. The Secretary shall not approve a petition
from a State that extends the remaining period of a
withdrawal of an area from leasing for a total of more than
10 years. However, the Secretary may approve petitions to
extend the withdrawal from leasing of any area ad infinitum,
subject only to the limitations contained in this subsection.
``(3) Failure to act.--If the Secretary fails to approve or
deny a petition in accordance with paragraph (2) the petition
shall be considered to be approved 90 days after receipt of
the petition.
``(i) Effect of Other Laws.--Adoption by any Adjacent State
of any constitutional provision, or enactment of any State
statute, that has the effect, as determined by the Secretary,
of restricting either the Governor or the Legislature, or
both, from exercising full discretion related to subsection
(g) or (h), or both, shall automatically (1) prohibit any
sharing of OCS Receipts under this Act with the Adjacent
State, and its coastal political subdivisions, and (2)
prohibit the Adjacent State from exercising any authority
under subsection (h), for the duration of the restriction.
The Secretary shall make the determination of the existence
of such restricting constitutional provision or State statute
within 30 days of a petition by any outer Continental Shelf
lessee or coastal State.''.
SEC. 10. OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF LEASING PROGRAM.
Section 18 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1344) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by adding at the end of paragraph
(3) the following: ``The Secretary shall, in each 5-year
program, include lease sales that when viewed as a whole
propose to offer for oil and gas or natural gas leasing at
least 75 percent of the available unleased acreage within
each OCS Planning Area. Available unleased acreage is that
portion of the outer Continental Shelf that is not under
lease at the time of the proposed lease sale, and has not
otherwise been made unavailable for leasing by law.'';
(2) in subsection (c), by striking so much as precedes
paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
``(c)(1) During the preparation of any proposed leasing
program under this section, the Secretary shall consider and
analyze leasing throughout the entire Outer Continental Shelf
without regard to any other law affecting such leasing.
During this preparation the Secretary shall invite and
consider suggestions from any interested Federal agency,
including the Attorney General, in consultation with the
Federal Trade Commission, and from the Governor of any
coastal State. The Secretary may also invite or consider any
suggestions from the executive of any local government in a
coastal State that have been previously submitted to the
Governor of such State, and from any other person. Further,
the Secretary shall consult with the Secretary of Defense
regarding military operational needs in the outer Continental
Shelf. The Secretary shall work with the Secretary of Defense
to resolve any conflicts that might arise regarding offering
any area of the outer Continental Shelf for oil and gas or
natural gas leasing. If the Secretaries are not able to
resolve all such conflicts, any unresolved issues shall be
elevated to the President for resolution.
``(2) After the consideration and analysis required by
paragraph (1), including the consideration of the suggestions
received from any interested Federal agency, the Federal
Trade Commission, the Governor of any coastal State, any
local government of a coastal State, and any other person,
the Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register a
proposed leasing program accompanied by a draft environmental
impact statement prepared pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969. After the publishing of the
proposed leasing program and during the comment period
provided for on the draft environmental impact statement, the
Secretary shall submit a copy of the proposed program to the
Governor of each affected State for review and comment. The
Governor may solicit comments from those executives of local
governments in the Governor's State that the Governor, in the
discretion of the Governor, determines will be affected by
the proposed program. If any comment by such Governor is
received by the Secretary at least 15 days prior to
submission to the Congress pursuant to paragraph (3) and
includes a request for any modification of such proposed
program, the Secretary shall reply in writing, granting or
denying such request in whole or in part, or granting such
request in such modified form as the Secretary considers
appropriate, and stating the Secretary's reasons therefor.
All such correspondence between the Secretary and the
Governor of any affected State, together with any additional
information and data relating thereto, shall accompany such
proposed program when it is submitted to the Congress.''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(i) Projection of State Adjacent Zone Resources and State
and Local Government Shares of OCS Receipts.--Concurrent with
the publication of the scoping notice at the beginning of the
development of each 5-year outer Continental Shelf oil and
gas leasing program, or as soon thereafter as possible, the
Secretary shall--
``(1) provide to each Adjacent State a current estimate of
proven and potential oil and gas resources located within the
State's Adjacent Zone; and
``(2) provide to each Adjacent State, and coastal political
subdivisions thereof, a best-efforts projection of the OCS
Receipts that the Secretary expects will be shared with each
Adjacent State, and its coastal political subdivisions, using
the assumption that the unleased tracts within the State's
Adjacent Zone are fully made available for leasing, including
long-term projected OCS Receipts. In addition, the Secretary
shall include a macroeconomic estimate of the impact of such
leasing on the national economy and each State's economy,
including investment, jobs, revenues, personal income, and
other categories.''.
SEC. 11. COORDINATION WITH ADJACENT STATES.
Section 19 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1345) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a) in the first sentence by inserting
``, for any tract located within the Adjacent State's
Adjacent Zone,'' after ``government''; and
(2) by adding the following:
``(f)(1) No Federal agency may permit or otherwise approve,
without the concurrence of the Adjacent State, the
construction of a crude oil or petroleum products (or both)
pipeline within the part of the Adjacent State's Adjacent
Zone that is withdrawn from oil and gas or natural gas
leasing, except that such a pipeline may be approved, without
such Adjacent State's concurrence, to pass through such
Adjacent Zone if at least 50 percent of the production
projected to be carried by the pipeline within its first 10
years of operation is from areas of the Adjacent State's
Adjacent Zone.
``(2) No State may prohibit the construction within its
Adjacent Zone or its State waters of a natural gas pipeline
that will transport natural gas produced from the outer
Continental Shelf. However, an Adjacent State may prevent a
proposed natural gas pipeline landing location if it proposes
two alternate landing locations in the Adjacent State,
acceptable to the Adjacent State, located within 50 miles on
either side of the proposed landing location.''.
SEC. 12. ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES.
Section 20(d) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1346) is amended--
(1) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(d)''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) For all programs, lease sales, leases, and actions
under this Act, the following shall apply regarding the
application of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969:
``(A) Granting or directing lease suspensions and the
conduct of all preliminary activities on outer Continental
Shelf tracts, including seismic activities, are categorically
excluded from the need to prepare either an environmental
assessment or an environmental impact statement, and the
Secretary shall not be required to analyze whether any
exceptions to a categorical exclusion apply for activities
conducted under the authority of this Act.
``(B) The environmental impact statement developed in
support of each 5-year oil and gas leasing program provides
the environmental analysis for all lease sales to be
conducted under the program and such sales shall not be
subject to further environmental analysis.
``(C) Exploration plans shall not be subject to any
requirement to prepare an environmental impact statement, and
the Secretary may find that exploration plans are eligible
for categorical exclusion due to the impacts already being
considered within an environmental impact statement or due to
mitigation measures included within the plan.
``(D) Within each OCS Planning Area, after the preparation
of the first development and production plan environmental
impact statement for a leased tract within the Area, future
development and production plans for leased tracts within the
Area shall only require the preparation of an environmental
assessment unless the most recent development and production
plan environmental impact statement within the Area was
finalized more than 10 years prior to the date of the
approval of the plan, in which case an environmental impact
statement shall be required.''.
SEC. 13. REVIEW OF OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF DEVELOPMENT AND
PRODUCTION PLANS.
Section 25 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1351(a)) is amended to read as follows:
``SEC. 25. REVIEW OF OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF DEVELOPMENT AND
PRODUCTION PLANS.
``(a) Development and Production Plans; Submission to
Secretary; Statement of Facilities and Operation; Submission
to Governors of Affected States and Local Governments.--
``(1) Prior to development and production pursuant to an
oil and gas lease issued on or after September 18, 1978, for
any area of the outer Continental Shelf, or issued or
maintained prior to September 18, 1978, for any area of the
outer Continental Shelf, with respect to which no oil or gas
has been discovered in paying quantities prior to September
18, 1978, the lessee shall submit a development and
production plan (hereinafter in this section referred to as a
`plan') to the Secretary for review.
``(2) A plan shall be accompanied by a statement describing
all facilities and operations, other than those on the outer
Continental Shelf, proposed by the lessee and known by the
lessee (whether or not owned or operated by such lessee) that
will be constructed or utilized in the development and
production of oil or gas from the lease area, including the
location and site of such facilities and operations, the
land, labor, material, and energy requirements associated
with such facilities and operations, and all environmental
and safety safeguards to be implemented.
``(3) Except for any privileged or proprietary information
(as such term is defined in regulations issued by the
Secretary), the Secretary, within 30 days after receipt of a
plan and statement, shall--
[[Page H4851]]
``(A) submit such plan and statement to the Governor of any
affected State, and upon request to the executive of any
affected local government; and
``(B) make such plan and statement available to any
appropriate interstate regional entity and the public.
``(b) Development and Production Activities in Accordance
With Plan as Lease Requirement.--After enactment of the Deep
Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006, no oil and gas lease may
be issued pursuant to this Act in any region of the outer
Continental Shelf, unless such lease requires that
development and production activities be carried out in
accordance with a plan that complies with the requirements of
this section. This section shall also apply to leases that do
not have an approved development and production plan as of
the date of enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act
of 2006.
``(c) Scope and Contents of Plan.--A plan may apply to more
than one oil and gas lease, and shall set forth, in the
degree of detail established by regulations issued by the
Secretary--
``(1) the general work to be performed;
``(2) a description of all facilities and operations
located on the outer Continental Shelf that are proposed by
the lessee or known by the lessee (whether or not owned or
operated by such lessee) to be directly related to the
proposed development, including the location and size of such
facilities and operations, and the land, labor, material, and
energy requirements associated with such facilities and
operations;
``(3) the environmental safeguards to be implemented on the
outer Continental Shelf and how such safeguards are to be
implemented;
``(4) all safety standards to be met and how such standards
are to be met;
``(5) an expected rate of development and production and a
time schedule for performance; and
``(6) such other relevant information as the Secretary may
by regulation require.
``(d) Completeness Review of the Plan.--
``(1) Prior to commencing any activity under a development
and production plan pursuant to any oil and gas lease issued
or maintained under this Act, the lessee shall certify that
the plan is consistent with the terms of the lease and that
it is consistent with all statutory and regulatory
requirements in effect on the date of issuance of the lease,
and any regulations promulgated under this Act related to the
conservation of resources after the date of lease issuance.
The plan shall include all required information and
documentation required under subsection (c).
``(2) The Secretary shall review the plan for completeness
within 30 days of submission. If the Secretary finds that the
plan is not complete, the Secretary shall notify the lessee
with a detailed explanation of such modifications of such
plan as are necessary to achieve completeness. The Secretary
shall have 30 days to review a modified plan for
completeness.
``(e) Review for Consistency of the Plan.--
``(1) After a determination that a plan is complete, the
Secretary shall have 120 days to conduct a review of the
plan, to ensure that it is consistent with the terms of the
lease, and that it is consistent with all such statutory and
regulatory requirements applicable to the lease. The review
shall ensure that the plan is consistent with lease terms,
and statutory and regulatory requirements applicable to the
lease, related to national security or national defense,
including any military operating stipulations or other
restrictions. The Secretary shall seek the assistance of the
Department of Defense in the conduct of the review of any
plan prepared under this section for a lease containing
military operating stipulations or other restrictions and
shall accept the assistance of the Department of Defense in
the conduct of the review of any plan prepared under this
section for any other lease when the Secretary of Defense
requests an opportunity to participate in the review. If the
Secretary finds that the plan is not consistent, the
Secretary shall notify the lessee with a detailed explanation
of such modifications of such plan as are necessary to
achieve consistency.
``(2) The Secretary shall have 120 days to review a
modified plan.
``(3) The lessee shall not conduct any activities under the
plan during any 120-day review period, or thereafter until
the plan has been modified to achieve compliance as so
notified.
``(4) After review by the Secretary provided for by this
section, a lessee may operate pursuant to the plan without
further review or approval by the Secretary.
``(f) Review of Revision of the Approved Plan.--The lessee
may submit to the Secretary any revision of a plan if the
lessee determines that such revision will lead to greater
recovery of oil and natural gas, improve the efficiency,
safety, and environmental protection of the recovery
operation, is the only means available to avoid substantial
economic hardship to the lessee, or is otherwise not
inconsistent with the provisions of this Act, to the extent
such revision is consistent with protection of the human,
marine, and coastal environments. The process to be used for
the review of any such revision shall be the same as that set
forth in subsections (d) and (e).
``(g) Cancellation of Lease on Failure to Submit Plan or
Comply With a Plan.--Whenever the owner of any lease fails to
submit a plan in accordance with regulations issued under
this section, or fails to comply with a plan, the lease may
be canceled in accordance with section 5(c) and (d).
Termination of a lease because of failure to comply with a
plan, including required modifications or revisions, shall
not entitle a lessee to any compensation.
``(h) Production and Transportation of Natural Gas;
Submission of Plan to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission;
Impact Statement.--If any development and production plan
submitted to the Secretary pursuant to this section provides
for the production and transportation of natural gas, the
lessee shall contemporaneously submit to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission that portion of such plan that relates
to the facilities for transportation of natural gas. The
Secretary and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission shall
agree as to which of them shall prepare an environmental
impact statement pursuant to the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) applicable to
such portion of such plan, or conduct studies as to the
effect on the environment of implementing it. Thereafter, the
findings and recommendations by the agency preparing such
environmental impact statement or conducting such studies
pursuant to such agreement shall be adopted by the other
agency, and such other agency shall not independently prepare
another environmental impact statement or duplicate such
studies with respect to such portion of such plan, but the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, in connection with its
review of an application for a certificate of public
convenience and necessity applicable to such transportation
facilities pursuant to section 7 of the Natural Gas Act (15
U.S.C. 717f), may prepare such environmental studies or
statement relevant to certification of such transportation
facilities as have not been covered by an environmental
impact statement or studies prepared by the Secretary. The
Secretary, in consultation with the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, shall promulgate rules to implement this
subsection, but the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
shall retain sole authority with respect to rules and
procedures applicable to the filing of any application with
the Commission and to all aspects of the Commission's review
of, and action on, any such application.''.
SEC. 14. FEDERAL ENERGY NATURAL RESOURCES ENHANCEMENT FUND
ACT OF 2006.
(a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
(1) Energy and minerals exploration, development, and
production on Federal onshore and offshore lands, including
bio-based fuel, natural gas, minerals, oil, geothermal, and
power from wind, waves, currents, and thermal energy,
involves significant outlays of funds by Federal and State
wildlife, fish, and natural resource management agencies for
environmental studies, planning, development, monitoring, and
management of wildlife, fish, air, water, and other natural
resources.
(2) State wildlife, fish, and natural resource management
agencies are funded primarily through permit and license fees
paid to the States by the general public to hunt and fish,
and through Federal excise taxes on equipment used for these
activities.
(3) Funds generated from consumptive and recreational uses
of wildlife, fish, and other natural resources currently are
inadequate to address the natural resources related to energy
and minerals development on Federal onshore and offshore
lands.
(4) Funds available to Federal agencies responsible for
managing Federal onshore and offshore lands and Federal-trust
wildlife and fish species and their habitats are inadequate
to address the natural resources related to energy and
minerals development on Federal onshore and offshore lands.
(5) Receipts derived from sales, bonus bids, and royalties
under the mineral leasing laws of the United States are paid
to the Treasury through the Minerals Management Service of
the Department of the Interior.
(6) None of the receipts derived from sales, bonus bids,
and royalties under the minerals leasing laws of the United
States are paid to the Federal or State agencies to examine,
monitor, and manage wildlife, fish, air, water, and other
natural resources related to natural gas, oil, and mineral
exploration and development.
(b) Purposes.--It is the purpose of this section to--
(1) establish a fund for the monitoring and management of
wildlife and fish, and their habitats, and air, water, and
other natural resources related to energy and minerals
development on Federal onshore and offshore lands;
(2) make available receipts derived from sales, bonus bids,
royalties, and fees from onshore and offshore gas, mineral,
oil, and any additional form of energy and minerals
development under the laws of the United States for the
purposes of such fund;
(3) distribute funds from such fund each fiscal year to the
Secretary of the Interior and the States; and
(4) use the distributed funds to secure the necessary
trained workforce or contractual services to conduct
environmental studies, planning, development, monitoring, and
post-development management of wildlife and fish and their
habitats and air, water, and other natural resources that may
be related to bio-based fuel, gas, mineral, oil, wind, or
other energy exploration, development, transportation,
transmission, and associated activities on Federal onshore
and offshore lands, including, but not limited to--
(A) pertinent research, surveys, and environmental analyses
conducted to identify any impacts on wildlife, fish, air,
water, and other natural resources from energy and mineral
exploration, development, production, and transportation or
transmission;
(B) projects to maintain, improve, or enhance wildlife and
fish populations and their habitats or air, water, or other
natural resources, including activities under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973;
(C) research, surveys, environmental analyses, and projects
that assist in managing, including mitigating either onsite
or offsite, or both, the impacts of energy and mineral
activities on
[[Page H4852]]
wildlife, fish, air, water, and other natural resources; and
(D) projects to teach young people to live off the land.
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Enhancement fund.--The term ``Enhancement Fund'' means
the Federal Energy Natural Resources Enhancement Fund
established by subsection (d).
(2) State.--The term ``State'' means the Governor of the
State.
(d) Establishment and Use of Federal Energy Natural
Resources Enhancement Fund.--
(1) Enhancement fund.--There is established in the Treasury
a separate account to be known as the ``Federal Energy
Natural Resources Enhancement Fund''.
(2) Funding.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall deposit
in the Enhancement Fund--
(A) such sums as are provided by sections 9(b)(5)(A)(ii),
9(b)(5)(B)(ii), 9(c)(4)(A)(ii), and 9(c)(4)(B)(ii) of the
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, as amended by this Act;
(B)(i) during the period of October 1, 2006, through
September 30, 2015, one percent of all sums paid into the
Treasury under section 35 of the Mineral Leasing Act (30
U.S.C. 191), and
(ii) beginning October 1, 2015, and thereafter, 2.5 percent
of all sums paid into the Treasury under section 35 of the
Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 191); and
(C)(i) during the period of October 1, 2006, through
September 30, 2015, one percent of all sums paid into the
Treasury from receipts derived from bonus bids and royalties
from other mineral leasing on public lands, and
(ii) beginning October 1, 2015, and thereafter, 2.5 percent
of all sums paid into the Treasury from receipts derived from
bonus bids and royalties from other mineral leasing on public
lands.
(3) Investments.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall
invest the amounts deposited under paragraph (2) and all
accrued interest on the amounts deposited under paragraph (2)
only in interest bearing obligations of the United States or
in obligations guaranteed as to both principal and interest
by the United States.
(4) Payment to secretary of the interior.--
(A) In general.--Beginning with fiscal year 2007, and in
each fiscal year thereafter, one-third of amounts deposited
into the Enhancement Fund, together with the interest
thereon, shall be available, without fiscal year limitations,
to the Secretary of the Interior for use for the purposes
described in (b)(4).
(B) Withdrawals and transfer of funds.--The Secretary of
the Treasury shall withdraw such amounts from the Enhancement
Fund as the Secretary of the Interior may request, subject to
the limitation in (A), and transfer such amounts to the
Secretary of the Interior to be used, at the discretion of
the Secretary of the Interior, by the Minerals Management
Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and the United States
Fish and Wildlife Service for use for the purposes described
in subsection (b)(4).
(5) Payment to states.--
(A) In general.--Beginning with fiscal year 2007, and in
each fiscal year thereafter, two-thirds of amounts deposited
into the Enhancement Fund, together with the interest
thereon, shall be available, without fiscal year limitations,
to the States for use for the purposes described in (b)(4).
(B) Withdrawals and transfer of funds.--Within the first 90
days of each fiscal year, the Secretary of the Treasury shall
withdraw amounts from the Enhancement Fund and transfer such
amounts to the States based on the proportion of all receipts
that were collected the previous fiscal year from Federal
leases within the boundaries of each State and each State's
outer Continental Shelf Adjacent Zone as determined in
accordance with section 4(a) of the Outer Continental Shelf
Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1333(a)), as amended by this Act.
(C) Use of payments by state.--Each State shall use the
payments made under subparagraph (B) only for carrying out
projects and programs for the purposes described in (b)(4).
(D) Encourage use of private funds by state.--Each State
shall use the payments made under subparagraph (B) to
leverage private funds for carrying out projects for the
purposes described in (b)(4).
(e) Limitation on Use.--Amounts available under this
section may not be used for the purchase of any interest in
land.
(f) Reports to Congress.--
(1) In general.--Beginning in fiscal year 2008 and
continuing for each fiscal year thereafter, the Secretary of
the Interior and each State receiving funds from the
Enhancement Fund shall submit a report to the Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and the Committee
on Resources of the House of Representatives.
(2) Required information.--Reports submitted to the
Congress by the Secretary of the Interior and States under
this subsection shall include the following information
regarding expenditures during the previous fiscal year:
(A) A summary of pertinent scientific research and surveys
conducted to identify impacts on wildlife, fish, and other
natural resources from energy and mineral developments.
(B) A summary of projects planned and completed to
maintain, improve or enhance wildlife and fish populations
and their habitats or other natural resources.
(C) A list of additional actions that assist, or would
assist, in managing, including mitigating either onsite or
offsite, or both, the impacts of energy and mineral
development on wildlife, fish, and other natural resources.
(D) A summary of private (non-Federal) funds used to plan,
conduct, and complete the plans and programs identified in
paragraphs (2)(A) and (2)(B).
SEC. 15. TERMINATION OF EFFECT OF LAWS PROHIBITING THE
SPENDING OF APPROPRIATED FUNDS FOR CERTAIN
PURPOSES.
All provisions of existing Federal law prohibiting the
spending of appropriated funds to conduct oil and natural gas
leasing and preleasing activities, or to issue a lease to any
person, for any area of the outer Continental Shelf shall
have no force or effect.
SEC. 16. OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF INCOMPATIBLE USE.
(a) In General.--No Federal agency may permit construction
or operation (or both) of any facility, or designate or
maintain a restricted transportation corridor or operating
area on the Federal outer Continental Shelf or in State
waters, that will be incompatible with, as determined by the
Secretary of the Interior, oil and gas or natural gas leasing
and substantially full exploration and production of tracts
that are geologically prospective for oil or natural gas (or
both).
(b) Exceptions.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to any
facility, transportation corridor, or operating area the
construction, operation, designation, or maintenance of which
is or will be--
(1) located in an area of the outer Continental Shelf that
is unavailable for oil and gas or natural gas leasing by
operation of law;
(2) used for a military readiness activity (as defined in
section 315(f) of Public Law 107-314; 16 U.S.C. 703 note); or
(3) required in the national interest, as determined by the
President.
SEC. 17. REPURCHASE OF CERTAIN LEASES.
(a) Authority to Repurchase and Cancel Certain Leases.--The
Secretary of the Interior shall repurchase and cancel any
Federal oil and gas, geothermal, coal, oil shale, tar sands,
or other mineral lease, whether onshore or offshore, if the
Secretary finds that such lease qualifies for repurchase and
cancellation under the regulations authorized by this
section.
(b) Regulations.--Not later than 365 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall publish a
final regulation stating the conditions under which a lease
referred to in subsection (a) would qualify for repurchase
and cancellation, and the process to be followed regarding
repurchase and cancellation. Such regulation shall include,
but not be limited to, the following:
(1) The Secretary shall repurchase and cancel a lease after
written request by the lessee upon a finding by the Secretary
that--
(A) a request by the lessee for a required permit or other
approval complied with applicable law, except the Coastal
Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq.), and
terms of the lease and such permit or other approval was
denied;
(B) a Federal agency failed to act on a request by the
lessee for a required permit, other approval, or
administrative appeal within a regulatory or statutory time-
frame associated with the requested action, whether advisory
or mandatory, or if none, within 180 days; or
(C) a Federal agency attached a condition of approval,
without agreement by the lessee, to a required permit or
other approval if such condition of approval was not mandated
by Federal statute or regulation in effect on the date of
lease issuance, or was not specifically allowed under the
terms of the lease.
(2) A lessee shall not be required to exhaust
administrative remedies regarding a permit request,
administrative appeal, or other required request for approval
for the purposes of this section.
(3) The Secretary shall make a final agency decision on a
request by a lessee under this section within 180 days of
request.
(4) Compensation to a lessee to repurchase and cancel a
lease under this section shall be the amount that a lessee
would receive in a restitution case for a material breach of
contract.
(5) Compensation shall be in the form of a check or
electronic transfer from the Department of the Treasury from
funds deposited into miscellaneous receipts under the
authority of the same Act that authorized the issuance of the
lease being repurchased.
(6) Failure of the Secretary to make a final agency
decision on a request by a lessee under this section within
180 days of request shall result in a 10 percent increase in
the compensation due to the lessee if the lease is ultimately
repurchased.
(c) No Prejudice.--This section shall not be interpreted to
prejudice any other rights that the lessee would have in the
absence of this section.
SEC. 18. OFFSITE ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any person
conducting activities under the Mineral Leasing Act (30
U.S.C. 181 et seq.), the Geothermal Steam Act (30 U.S.C. 1001
et seq.), the Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands (30
U.S.C. 351 et seq.), the Weeks Act (16 U.S.C. 552 et seq.),
the General Mining Act of 1872 (30 U.S.C. 22 et seq.), the
Materials Act of 1947 (30 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), or the Outer
Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.), may in
satisfying any mitigation requirements associated with such
activities propose mitigation measures on a site away from
the area impacted and the Secretary of the Interior shall
accept these proposed measures if the Secretary finds that
they generally achieve the purposes for which mitigation
measures appertained.
SEC. 19. AMENDMENTS TO THE MINERAL LEASING ACT.
Section 17(g) of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 226(g))
is amended to read as follows:
``(g) Regulation of Surface-Disturbing Activities.--
``(1) Regulation of surface-disturbing activities.--The
Secretary of the Interior, or for National Forest lands, the
Secretary of Agriculture, shall regulate all surface-
disturbing activities conducted pursuant to any lease issued
[[Page H4853]]
under this Act, and shall determine reclamation and other
actions as required in the interest of conservation of
surface resources.
``(2) Submission of exploration plan; completion review;
compliance review.--
``(A) Prior to beginning oil and gas exploration
activities, a lessee shall submit an exploration plan to the
Secretary of the Interior for review.
``(B) The Secretary shall review the plan for completeness
within 10 days of submission.
``(C) In the event the exploration plan is determined to be
incomplete, the Secretary shall notify the lessee in writing
and specify the items or information needed to complete the
exploration plan.
``(D) The Secretary shall have 10 days to review any
modified exploration plan submitted by the lessee.
``(E) To be deemed complete, an exploration plan shall
include, in the degree of detail to be determined by the
Secretary by rule or regulation--
``(i) a drilling plan containing a description of the
drilling program;
``(ii) the surface and projected completion zone location;
``(iii) pertinent geologic data;
``(iv) expected hazards, and proposed mitigation measures
to address such hazards;
``(v) a schedule of anticipated exploration activities to
be undertaken;
``(vi) a description of equipment to be used for such
activities;
``(vii) a certification from the lessee stating that the
exploration plan complies with all lease, regulatory and
statutory requirements in effect on the date of the issuance
of the lease and any regulations promulgated after the date
of lease issuance related to the conservation of resources;
``(viii) evidence that the lessee has secured an adequate
bond, surety, or other financial arrangement prior to
commencement of any surface disturbing activity;
``(ix) a plan that details the complete and timely
reclamation of the lease tract; and
``(x) such other relevant information as the Secretary may
by regulation require.
``(F) Upon a determination that the exploration plan is
complete, the Secretary shall have 30 days from the date the
plan is deemed complete to conduct a review of the plan.
``(G) If the Secretary finds the exploration plan is not
consistent with all statutory and regulatory requirements
described in subparagraph (E)(vii), the Secretary shall
notify the lessee with a detailed explanation of such
modifications of the exploration plan as are necessary to
achieve compliance.
``(H) The lessee shall not take any action under the
exploration plan within a 30 day review period, or thereafter
until the plan has been modified to achieve compliance as so
notified.
``(I) After review by the Secretary provided by this
subsection, a lessee may operate pursuant to the plan without
further review or approval by the Secretary.
``(3) Plan revisions; conduct of exploration activities.--
``(A) If a significant revision of an exploration plan
under this subsection is submitted to the Secretary, the
process to be used for the review of such revision shall be
the same as set forth in paragraph (1) of this subsection.
``(B) All exploration activities pursuant to any lease
shall be conducted in accordance with an exploration plan
that has been submitted to and reviewed by the Secretary or a
revision of such plan.
``(4) Submission of development and production plan;
completeness review; compliance review.--
``(A) Prior to beginning oil and gas development and
production activities, a lessee shall submit a development
and exploration plan to the Secretary of the Interior. Upon
submission, such plans shall be subject to a review for
completeness.
``(B) The Secretary shall review the plan for completeness
within 30 days of submission.
``(C) In the event a development and production plan is
determined to be incomplete, the Secretary shall notify the
lessee in writing and specify the items or information needed
to complete the plan.
``(D) The Secretary shall have 30 days to review for
completeness any modified development and production plan
submitted by the lessee.
``(E) To be deemed complete, a development and production
plan shall include, in the degree of detail to be determined
by the Secretary by rule or regulation--
``(i) a drilling plan containing a description of the
drilling program;
``(ii) the surface and projected completion zone location;
``(iii) pertinent geologic data;
``(iv) expected hazards, and proposed mitigation measures
to address such hazards;
``(v) a statement describing all facilities and operations
proposed by the lessee and known by the lessee (whether or
not owned or operated by such lessee) that shall be
constructed or utilized in the development and production of
oil or gas from the leases areas, including the location and
site of such facilities and operations, the land, labor,
material, and energy requirements associated with such
facilities and operations;
``(vi) the general work to be performed;
``(vii) the environmental safeguards to be implemented in
connection with the development and production and how such
safeguards are to be implemented;
``(viii) all safety standards to be met and how such
standards are to be met;
``(ix) an expected rate of development and production and a
time schedule for performance;
``(x) a certification from the lessee stating that the
development and production plan complies with all lease,
regulatory, and statutory requirements in effect on the date
of issuance of the lease, and any regulations promulgated
after the date of lease issuance related to the conservation
of resources;
``(xi) evidence that the lessee has secured an adequate
bond, surety, or other financial arrangement prior to
commencement of any surface disturbing activity;
``(xii) a plan that details the complete and timely
reclamation of the lease tract; and
``(xiii) such other relevant information as the Secretary
may by regulation require.
``(F) Upon a determination that the development and
production plan is complete, the Secretary shall have 120
days from the date the plan is deemed complete to conduct a
review of the plan.
``(G) If the Secretary finds the development and production
plan is not consistent with all statutory and regulatory
requirements described in subparagraph (E)(x), the Secretary
shall notify the lessee with a detailed explanation of such
modifications of the development and production plan as are
necessary to achieve compliance.
``(H) The lessee shall not take any action under the
development and production plan within a 120 day review
period, or thereafter until the plan has been modified to
achieve compliance as so notified.
``(5) Plan revisions; conduct of development and production
activities.--
``(A) If a significant revision of a development and
production plan under this subsection is submitted to the
Secretary, the process to be used for the review of such
revision shall be the same as set forth in paragraph (4) of
this subsection.
``(B) All development and production activities pursuant to
any lease shall be conducted in accordance with a development
and production plan that has been submitted to and reviewed
by the Secretary or a revision of such plan.
``(6) Cancellation of lease on failure to submit plan or
comply with approved plan.--Whenever the owner of any lease
fails to submit a plan in accordance with regulations issued
under this section, or fails to comply with a plan, the lease
may be canceled in accordance with section 31. Termination of
a lease because of failure to comply with a plan, including
required modifications or revisions, shall not entitle a
lessee to any compensation.''.
SEC. 20. MINERALS MANAGEMENT SERVICE.
The bureau known as the ``Minerals Management Service'' in
the Department of the Interior shall be known as the
``National Ocean Resources and Royalty Service''.
SEC. 21. AUTHORITY TO USE DECOMMISSIONED OFFSHORE OIL AND GAS
PLATFORMS AND OTHER FACILITIES FOR ARTIFICIAL
REEF, SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH, OR OTHER USES.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Rigs
to Reefs Act of 2006''.
(b) In General.--The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1301 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 9
the following:
``SEC. 10. USE OF DECOMMISSIONED OFFSHORE OIL AND GAS
PLATFORMS AND OTHER FACILITIES FOR ARTIFICIAL
REEF, SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH, OR OTHER USES.
``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall issue regulations
under which the Secretary may authorize use of an offshore
oil and gas platform or other facility that is decommissioned
from service for oil and gas purposes for an artificial reef,
scientific research, or any other use authorized under
section 8(p) or any other applicable Federal law.
``(b) Transfer Requirements.--The Secretary shall not allow
the transfer of a decommissioned offshore oil and gas
platform or other facility to another person unless the
Secretary is satisfied that the transferee is sufficiently
bonded, endowed, or otherwise financially able to fulfill its
obligations, including but not limited to--
``(1) ongoing maintenance of the platform or other
facility;
``(2) any liability obligations that might arise;
``(3) removal of the platform or other facility if
determined necessary by the Secretary; and
``(4) any other requirements and obligations that the
Secretary may deem appropriate by regulation.
``(c) Plugging and Abandonment.--The Secretary shall ensure
that plugging and abandonment of wells is accomplished at an
appropriate time.
``(d) Potential to Petition to Opt-Out of Regulations.--An
Adjacent State acting through a resolution of its
legislature, with concurrence of its Governor, may
preliminarily petition to opt-out of the application of
regulations promulgated under this section to platforms and
other facilities located in the area of its Adjacent Zone
within 12 miles of the coastline. Upon receipt of the
preliminary petition, the Secretary shall complete an
environmental assessment that documents the anticipated
environmental effects of approving the petition. The
Secretary shall provide the environmental assessment to the
State, which then has the choice of no action or confirming
its petition by further action of its legislature, with the
concurrence of its Governor. The Secretary is authorized to
except such area from the application of such regulations,
and shall approve any confirmed petition.
``(e) Limitation on Liability.--A person that had used an
offshore oil and gas platform or other facility for oil and
gas purposes and that no longer has any ownership or control
of the platform or other facility shall not be liable under
Federal law for any costs or damages arising from such
platform or other facility after the date the platform or
other facility is used for any purpose under subsection (a),
unless such costs or damages arise from--
``(1) use of the platform or other facility by the person
for development or production of oil or gas; or
[[Page H4854]]
``(2) another act or omission of the person.
``(f) Other Leasing and Use not Affected.--This section,
and the use of any offshore oil and gas platform or other
facility for any purpose under subsection (a), shall not
affect--
``(1) the authority of the Secretary to lease any area
under this Act; or
``(2) any activity otherwise authorized under this Act.''.
(c) Deadline for Regulations.--The Secretary of the
Interior shall issue regulations under subsection (b) by not
later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act.
(d) Study and Report on Effects of Removal of Platforms.--
Not later than one year after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Secretary of the Interior, in consultation with
other Federal agencies as the Secretary deems advisable,
shall study and report to the Congress regarding how the
removal of offshore oil and gas platforms and other
facilities from the outer Continental Shelf would affect
existing fish stocks and coral populations.
SEC. 22. REPEAL OF REQUIREMENT TO CONDUCT COMPREHENSIVE
INVENTORY OF OCS OIL AND NATURAL GAS RESOURCES.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-58) is
amended--
(1) by repealing section 357 (119 Stat. 720; 42 U.S.C.
15912); and
(2) in the table of contents in section 1(b), by striking
the item relating to such section 357.
SEC. 23. MINING AND PETROLEUM SCHOOLS.
(a) Federal Energy and Mineral Resources Professional
Development Fund.--
(1) Professional development fund.--There is established in
the Treasury a separate account to be known as the ``Federal
Energy And Mineral Resources Professional Development Fund''
(in this section referred to as the ``Professional
Development Fund'').
(2) Funding.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall deposit
in the Professional Development Fund--
(A) such sums as are provided by sections 9(b)(5)(A)(iii),
9(b)(5)(B)(iii), 9(c)(4)(A)(iii), and 9(c)(4)(B)(iii) of the
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, as amended by this Act;
(B)(i) during the period of October 1, 2006, through
September 30, 2015, one percent of all sums paid into the
Treasury under section 35 of the Mineral Leasing Act (30
U.S.C. 191), and
(ii) beginning October 1, 2015, and thereafter, 2.5 percent
of all sums paid into the Treasury under section 35 of the
Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 191);
(C)(i) during the period of October 1, 2006, through
September 30, 2015, one percent of all sums paid into the
Treasury from receipts derived from bonus bids and royalties
from other mineral leasing on public lands, and
(ii) beginning October 1, 2015, and thereafter, 2.5 percent
of all sums paid into the Treasury from receipts derived from
bonus bids and royalties from other mineral leasing on public
lands;
(D) donations received under paragraph (4);
(E) amounts referred to in section 2325 of the Revised
Statutes; and
(F) funds received under section 10 of the Energy and
Mineral Schools Reinvestment Act, as amended by this Act.
(3) Investments.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall
invest the amounts deposited under paragraph (2) and all
accrued interest on the amounts deposited under paragraph (2)
only in interest bearing obligations of the United States or
in obligations guaranteed as to both principal and interest
by the United States.
(4) Donations.--The Secretary of the Interior may solicit
and accept donations of funds for deposit into the
Professional Development Fund.
(5) Availability to secretary of the interior.--
(A) In general.--Beginning with fiscal year 2007, and in
each fiscal year thereafter, the amounts deposited into the
Professional Development Fund, together with the interest
thereon, shall be available, without fiscal year limitations,
to the Secretary of the Interior for use to carry out the
Energy and Mineral Schools Reinvestment Act.
(B) Withdrawals and transfer of funds.--The Secretary of
the Treasury shall withdraw such amounts from the
Professional Development Fund as the Secretary of the
Interior may request and transfer such amounts to the
Secretary of the Interior to be used, at the discretion of
the Secretary to carry out the Energy and Mineral Schools
Reinvestment Act.
(b) Maintenance and Restoration of Existing and Historic
Petroleum and Mining Engineering Programs.--Public Law 98-409
(30 U.S.C. 1221 et seq.) is amended to read as follows:
``SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
``This Act may be cited as the `Energy and Mineral Schools
Reinvestment Act'.
``SEC. 2. POLICY.
``It is the policy of the United States to maintain the
human capital needed to preserve and foster the economic,
energy, and mineral resources security of the United States.
The petroleum and mining engineering programs and the applied
geology and geophysics programs at State chartered schools,
universities, and institutions that produce human capital are
national assets and should be assisted with Federal funds to
ensure their continued health and existence.
``SEC. 3. MAINTAINING AND RESTORING HISTORIC AND EXISTING
PETROLEUM AND MINING ENGINEERING EDUCATION
PROGRAMS.
``(a) Using the funds in the Federal Energy And Mineral
Resources Professional Development Fund, the Secretary of the
Interior (in this Act referred to as the `Secretary') shall
provide funds to each historic and existing State-chartered
recognized petroleum or mining school to assist such schools,
universities, and institutions in maintaining programs in
petroleum, mining, and mineral engineering education and
research. All funds shall be directed only to these programs
and shall be subject to the conditions of this section. Such
funds shall not be less than 33 percent of the annual outlay
of funds under this Act.
``(b) In this Act the term `historic and existing State-
chartered recognized petroleum or mining school' means a
school, university, or educational institution with the
presence of an engineering program meeting the specific
program criteria, established by the member societies of
ABET, Inc., for petroleum, mining, or mineral engineering and
that is accredited on the date of enactment of the Deep Ocean
Energy Resources Act of 2006 by ABET, Inc.
``(c) It shall be the duty of each school, university, or
institution receiving funds under this section to provide for
and enhance the training of undergraduate and graduate
petroleum, mining, and mineral engineers through research,
investigations, demonstrations, and experiments. All such
work shall be carried out in a manner that will enhance
undergraduate education.
``(d) Each school, university, or institution receiving
funds under this Act shall maintain the program for which the
funds are provided for 10 years after the date of the first
receipt of such funds and take steps agreed to by the
Secretary to increase the number of undergraduate students
enrolled in and completing the programs of study in
petroleum, mining, and mineral engineering.
``(e) The research, investigation, demonstration,
experiment, and training authorized by this section may
include development and production of conventional and non-
conventional fuel resources, the production of metallic and
non-metallic mineral resources including industrial mineral
resources, and the production of stone, sand, and gravel. In
all cases the work carried out with funds made available
under this Act shall include a significant opportunity for
participation by undergraduate students.
``(f) Research funded by this Act related to energy and
mineral resource development and production may include
studies of petroleum, mining, and mineral extraction and
immediately related beneficiation technology; mineral
economics, reclamation technology and practices for active
operations, and the development of re-mining systems and
technologies to facilitate reclamation that fosters the
ultimate recovery of resources at abandoned petroleum,
mining, and aggregate production sites.
``(g) Grants for basic science and engineering studies and
research shall not require additional participation by
funding partners. Grants for studies to demonstrate the proof
of concept for science and engineering or the demonstration
of feasibility and implementation shall include participation
by industry and may include funding from other Federal
agencies.
``(h)(1) No funds made available under this section shall
be applied to the acquisition by purchase or lease of any
land or interests therein, or the rental, purchase,
construction, preservation, or repair of any building.
``(2) Funding made available under this section may be used
with the express approval of the Secretary for proposals that
will provide for maintaining or upgrading of existing
laboratories and laboratory equipment. Funding for such
maintenance shall not be used for university overhead
expenses.
``(3) Funding made available under this Act may be used for
maintaining and upgrading mines and oil and gas drilling rigs
owned by a school, university, or institution described in
this section that are used for undergraduate and graduate
training and worker safety training. All requests for funding
such mines and oil and gas drilling rigs must demonstrate
that they have been owned by the school, university, or
institution for 5 years prior to the date of enactment of the
Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006 and have been
actively used for instructional or training purposes during
that time.
``(4) Any funding made available under this section for
research, investigation, demonstration, experiment, or
training shall not be used for university overhead charges in
excess of 10 percent of the amount authorized by the
Secretary.
``SEC. 4. FORMER AND NEW PETROLEUM AND MINING ENGINEERING
PROGRAMS.
``A school, university, or educational institution that
formerly met the requirements of section 3(b) immediately
before the date of the enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy
Resources Act of 2006, or that seeks to establish a new
program described in section 3(b), shall be eligible for
funding under this Act only if it--
``(1) establishes a petroleum, mining, or mineral
engineering program that meets the specific program criteria
and is accredited as such by ABET, Inc.;
``(2) agrees to the conditions of subsections (c) through
(h) of section 3 and the Secretary, as advised by the
Committee established by section 11, determines that the
program will strengthen and increase the number of nationally
available, well- qualified faculty members in petroleum,
mining, and mineral engineering; and
``(3) agrees to maintain the accredited program for 10
years after the date of the first receipt of funds under this
Act.
``SEC. 5. FUNDING OF CONSORTIA OF HISTORIC AND EXISTING
SCHOOLS.
``Where appropriate, the Secretary may make funds available
to consortia of schools, universities, or institutions
described in sections 3, 4, and 6, including those consortia
that include schools, universities, or institutions that are
ineligible for funds under this Act if those schools,
universities, or institutions, respectively, have skills,
programs, or facilities specifically identified as needed by
the consortia to meet the necessary expenses for purposes
of--
[[Page H4855]]
``(1) specific energy and mineral research projects of
broad application that could not otherwise be undertaken,
including the expenses of planning and coordinating regional
petroleum, geothermal, mining, and mineral engineering or
beneficiation projects by two or more schools; and
``(2) research into any aspects of petroleum, geothermal,
mining, or mineral engineering or beneficiation problems,
including but not limited to exploration, that are related to
the mission of the Department of the Interior and that are
considered by the Committee to be desirable.
``SEC. 6. SUPPORT FOR SCHOOLS WITH ENERGY AND MINERAL
RESOURCE PROGRAMS IN PETROLEUM AND MINERAL
EXPLORATION GEOLOGY, PETROLEUM GEOPHYSICS, OR
MINING GEOPHYSICS.
``(a) Twenty percent of the annual outlay of funds under
this Act may be granted to schools, universities, and
institutions other than those described in sections 3 and 4.
``(b) The Secretary, as advised by the Committee
established by section 11, shall determine the eligibility of
a college or university to receive funding under this Act
using criteria that include--
``(1) the presence of a substantial program of
undergraduate and graduate geoscience instruction and
research in one or more of the following specialties:
petroleum geology, geothermal geology, mineral exploration
geology, economic geology, industrial minerals geology,
mining geology, petroleum geophysics, mining geophysics,
geological engineering, or geophysical engineering that has a
demonstrated history of achievement;
``(2) evidence of institutional commitment for the purposes
of this Act that includes a significant opportunity for
participation by undergraduate students in research;
``(3) evidence that such school, university, or institution
has or can obtain significant industrial cooperation in
activities within the scope of this Act;
``(4) agreement by the school, university, or institution
to maintain the programs for which the funding is sought for
the 10-year period beginning on the date the school,
university, or institution first receives such funds; and
``(5) requiring that such funding shall be for the purposes
set forth in subsections (c) through (h) of section 3 and
subject to the conditions set forth in section 3(h).
``SEC. 7. DESIGNATION OF FUNDS FOR SCHOLARSHIPS AND
FELLOWSHIPS.
``(a) The Secretary shall utilize 19 percent of the annual
outlay of funds under this Act for the purpose of providing
merit-based scholarships for undergraduate education,
graduate fellowships, and postdoctoral fellowships.
``(b) In order to receive a scholarship or a graduate
fellowship, an individual student must be a lawful permanent
resident of the United States or a United States citizen and
must agree in writing to complete a course of studies and
receive a degree in petroleum, mining, or mineral
engineering, petroleum geology, geothermal geology, mining
and economic geology, petroleum and mining geophysics, or
mineral economics.
``(c) The regulations required by section 9 shall require
that an individual, in order to retain a scholarship or
graduate fellowship, must continue in one of the course of
studies listed in subsection (b) of this section, must remain
in good academic standing, as determined by the school,
institution, or university and must allow for reinstatement
of the scholarship or graduate fellowship by the Secretary,
upon the recommendation of the school or institution. Such
regulations may also provide for recovery of funds from an
individual who fails to complete any of the courses of study
listed in subsection (b) of this section after notice that
such completion is a requirement of receipt funding under
this Act.
``SEC. 8. FUNDING CRITERIA FOR INSTITUTIONS.
``(a) Each application for funds under this Act shall
state, among other things, the nature of the project to be
undertaken; the period during which it will be pursued; the
qualifications of the personnel who will direct and conduct
it; the estimated costs; the importance of the project to the
Nation, region, or States concerned; its relation to other
known research projects theretofore pursued or being pursued;
the extent to which the proposed project will maximize the
opportunity for the training of undergraduate petroleum,
mining, and mineral engineers; geologists and geophysicists;
and the extent of participation by nongovernmental sources in
the project.
``(b) No funds shall be made available under this Act
except for a project approved by the Secretary. All funds
shall be made available upon the basis of merit of the
project, the need for the knowledge that it is expected to
produce when completed, and the opportunity it provides for
the undergraduate training of individuals as petroleum,
mining, and mineral engineers, geologists, and geophysicists.
``(c) Funds available under this Act shall be paid at such
times and in such amounts during each fiscal year as
determined by the Secretary, and upon vouchers approved by
the Secretary. Each school, university, or institution that
receives funds under this Act shall--
``(1) establish its plan to provide for the training of
individuals as petroleum, mining, and mineral engineers,
geologists, and geophysicists under a curriculum appropriate
to the field of mineral resources and mineral engineering and
related fields;
``(2) establish policies and procedures that assure that
Federal funds made available under this Act for any fiscal
year will supplement and, to the extent practicable, increase
the level of funds that would, in the absence of such Federal
funds, be made available for purposes of this Act, and in no
case supplant such funds; and
``(3) have an officer appointed by its governing authority
who shall receive and account for all funds paid under this
Act and shall make an annual report to the Secretary on or
before the first day of September of each year, on work
accomplished and the status of projects underway, together
with a detailed statement of the amounts received under this
Act during the preceding fiscal year, and of its
disbursements on schedules prescribed by the Secretary.
``(d) If any of the funds received by the authorized
receiving officer of a program under this Act are found by
the Secretary to have been improperly diminished, lost, or
misapplied, such funds shall be recovered by the Secretary.
``(e) Schools, universities, and institutions receiving
funds under this Act are authorized and encouraged to plan
and conduct programs under this Act in cooperation with each
other and with such other agencies, business enterprises and
individuals.
``SEC. 9. DUTIES OF SECRETARY.
``(a) The Secretary, acting through the Assistant Secretary
for Land and Minerals Management, shall administer this Act
and shall prescribe such rules and regulations as may be
necessary to carry out its provisions not later than 1 year
after the enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of
2006.
``(b)(1) There is established in the Department of the
Interior, under the supervision of the Assistant Secretary
for Land and Minerals Management, an office to be known as
the Office of Petroleum and Mining Schools (hereafter in this
Act referred to as the `Office') to administer the provisions
of this Act. There shall be a Director of the Office who
shall be a member of the Senior Executive Service. The
position of the Director shall be allocated from among the
existing Senior Executive Service positions at the Department
of the Interior and shall be a career reserved position as
defined in section 3132(a)(8) of title 5, United States Code.
``(2) The Director is authorized to appoint a Deputy
Director and to employ such officers and employees as may be
necessary to enable the Office to carry out its functions,
not to exceed fifteen. Such appointments shall be made from
existing positions at the Department of the Interior, and
shall be subject to the provisions of title 5, United States
Code, governing appointments in the competitive service. Such
positions shall be paid in accordance with the provisions of
chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of such title
relating to classification and General Schedule pay rates.
``(3) In carrying out his or her functions, the Director
shall assist and advise the Secretary and the Committee
established by section 11 of this Act by
``(A) providing professional and administrative staff
support for the Committee including recordkeeping and
maintaining minutes of all Committee and subcommittee
meetings;
``(B) coordinating the activities of the Committee with
Federal agencies and departments, and the schools,
universities, and institutions to which funds are provided
under this Act;
``(C) maintaining accurate records of funds disbursed for
all scholarships, fellowships, research grants, and grants
for career technical education purposes;
``(D) preparing any regulations required to implement this
Act;
``(E) conducting site visits at schools, universities, and
institutions receiving funding under this Act; and
``(F) serving as a central repository for reports and
clearing house for public information on research funded by
this Act.
``(4) The Director or an employee of the Office shall be
present at each meeting of the Committee established by
section 11 or a subcommittee of such Committee.
``(5) The Director is authorized to contract with public or
private agencies, institutions, and organizations and with
individuals without regard to section 3324(a) and (b) of
title 31, United States Code, and section 5 of title 41,
United States Code, in carrying out his or her functions.
``(6) As needed the Director shall ascertain whether the
requirements of this Act have been met by schools,
universities, institutions, and individuals, including the
payment of any revenues derived from patents into the fund
created by section 23(a) of this Act as required by section
10(d).
``(c) The Secretary, acting through the Office of Petroleum
and Mining Schools, shall furnish such advice and assistance
as will best promote the purposes of this Act, shall
participate in coordinating research, investigations,
demonstrations, and experiments initiated under this Act,
shall indicate to schools, universities, and institutions
receiving funds under this Act such lines of inquiry that
seem most important, and shall encourage and assist in the
establishment and maintenance of cooperation between such
schools, universities, and institutions, other research
organizations, the Department of the Interior, and other
Federal agencies.
``(d) The Secretary shall establish procedures--
``(1) to ensure that each employee and contractor of the
Office established by this section and each member of the
committee established by section 11 of this Act shall
disclose to the Secretary any financial interests in or
financial relationships with schools, universities,
institutions or individuals receiving funds, scholarships or
fellowships under this Act;
``(2) to require any employee, contractor, or member of the
committee with a financial relationship disclosed under
paragraph (1) to recuse themselves from--
``(A) any recommendation or decision regarding the awarding
of funds, scholarships or fellowships; or
``(B) any review, report, analysis or investigation
regarding compliance with the provisions of
[[Page H4856]]
this Act by a school, university, institution or any
individual.
``(e) On or before the first day of July of each year
beginning after the date of enactment of this sentence,
schools, universities, and institutions receiving funds under
this Act shall certify compliance with this Act and upon
request of the Director of the office established by this
section provide documentation of such compliance.
``(f) An individual granted a scholarship or fellowship
with funds provided under this Act shall through their
respective school, university, or institution, advise the
Director of the office established by this Act of progress
towards completion of the course of studies and upon the
awarding of the degree within 30 days after the award.
``(g) The regulations required by this section shall
include a preference for veterans and service members who
have received or will receive either the Afghanistan Campaign
Medal or the Iraq Campaign Medal as authorized by Public Law
108-234, and Executive Order 13363.
``SEC. 10. COORDINATION.
``(a) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to impair or
modify the legal relationship existing between any of the
schools, universities, and institutions under whose direction
a program is established with funds provided under this Act
and the government of the State in which it is located.
Nothing in this Act shall in any way be construed to
authorize Federal control or direction of education at any
school, university, or institution.
``(b) The programs authorized by this Act are intended to
enhance the Nation's petroleum, mining, and mineral
engineering education programs and to enhance educational
programs in petroleum and mining exploration and to increase
the number of individuals enrolled in and completing these
programs. To achieve this intent, the Secretary and the
Committee established by section 11 shall receive the
continuing advice and cooperation of all agencies of the
Federal Government concerned with the identification,
exploration, and development of energy and mineral resources.
``(c) Nothing in this Act is intended to give or shall be
construed as giving the Secretary any authority over mining
and mineral resources research conducted by any agency of the
Federal Government, or as repealing or diminishing existing
authorities or responsibilities of any agency of the Federal
Government to plan and conduct, contract for, or assist in
research in its area of responsibility and concern with
regard to mining and mineral resources.
``(d) The schools, universities, and institutions receiving
funding under this Act shall make detailed reports to the
Office of Petroleum and Mining Schools on projects completed,
in progress, or planned with funds provided under this Act.
All such reports shall available to the public on not less
than an annual basis through the Office of Petroleum and
Mining Schools. All uses, products, processes, patents, and
other developments resulting from any research,
demonstration, or experiment funded in whole or in part under
this Act shall be made available promptly to the general
public, subject to exception or limitation, if any, as the
Secretary may find necessary in the interest of national
security. Schools, universities, and institutions receiving
patents for inventions funded in whole or in part under this
Act shall be governed by the applicable Federal law, except
that one percent of gross annual revenues due to the holders
of the patents that are derived from such patents shall be
paid by the holders of the patents to the Federal Energy and
Mineral Resources Professional Development Fund established
by section 23(a) of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of
2006.
``SEC. 11. COMMITTEE ON PETROLEUM, MINING, AND MINERAL
ENGINEERING AND ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCE
EDUCATION.
``(a) The Secretary shall appoint a Committee on Petroleum,
Mining, and Mineral Engineering and Energy and Mineral
Resource Education composed of--
``(1) the Assistant Secretary of the Interior responsible
for land and minerals management and not more than 16 other
persons who are knowledgeable in the fields of mining and
mineral resources research, including 2 university
administrators one of whom shall be from historic and
existing petroleum and mining schools; a community,
technical, or tribal college administrator; a career
technical education educator; 6 representatives equally
distributed from the petroleum, mining, and aggregate
industries; a working miner; a working oilfield worker; a
representative of the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact
Commission; a representative from the Interstate Mining
Compact Commission; a representative from the Western
Governors Association; a representative of the State
geologists, and a representative of a State mining and
reclamation agency. In making these 16 appointments, the
Secretary shall consult with interested groups.
``(2) The Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals
Management, in the capacity of the Chairman of the Committee,
may have present during meetings of the Committee
representatives of Federal agencies with responsibility for
energy and minerals resources management, energy and mineral
resource investigations, energy and mineral commodity
information, international trade in energy and mineral
commodities, mining safety regulation and mine safety
research, and research into the development, production, and
utilization of energy and mineral commodities. These
representatives shall serve as technical advisors to the
committee and shall have no voting responsibilities.
``(b) The Committee shall consult with, and make
recommendations to, the Secretary on all matters relating to
funding energy and mineral resources research, the awarding
of scholarships and fellowships and allocation of funding
made under this Act. The Secretary shall consult with and
carefully consider recommendations of the Committee in such
matters.
``(c) Committee members, other than officers or employees
of Federal, State, or local governments, shall be, for each
day (including traveltime) during which they are performing
Committee business, paid at a rate fixed by the Secretary but
not in excess of the daily equivalent of the maximum rate of
pay for level IV of the Executive Schedule under section 5136
of title 5, United States Code, and shall be fully reimbursed
for travel, subsistence, and related expenses.
``(d) The Committee shall be chaired by the Assistant
Secretary of the Interior responsible for land and minerals
management. There shall also be elected a Vice Chairman by
the Committee from among the members referred to in this
section. The Vice Chairman shall perform such duties as are
determined to be appropriate by the committee, except that
the Chairman of the Committee must personally preside at all
meetings of the full Committee. The Committee may organize
itself into such subcommittees as the Committee may deem
appropriate.
``(e) Following completion of the report required by
section 385 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, the Committee
shall consider the recommendations of the report, ongoing
efforts in the schools, universities, and institutions
receiving funding under this Act, the Federal and State
Governments, and the private sector, and shall formulate and
recommend to the Secretary a national plan for a program
utilizing the fiscal resources provided under this Act. The
Committee shall submit such plan to the Secretary for
approval. Upon approval, the plan shall guide the Secretary
and the Committee in their actions under this Act.
``(f) Section 10 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5
U.S.C. App. 2) shall not apply to the Committee.
``SEC. 12. CAREER TECHNICAL EDUCATION.
``(a) Up to 25 percent of the annual outlay of funds under
this Act may be granted to schools or institutions including,
but not limited to, colleges, universities, community
colleges, tribal colleges, technical institutes, and
secondary schools, other than those described in sections 3,
4, 5, and 6.
``(b) The Secretary, as advised by the Committee
established under section 11, shall determine the eligibility
of a school or institution to receive funding under this
section using criteria that include--
``(1) the presence of a State-approved program in mining
engineering technology, petroleum engineering technology,
industrial engineering technology, or industrial technology
that--
``(A) is focused on technology and its use in energy and
mineral production and related maintenance, operational
safety, or energy infrastructure protection and security;
``(B) prepares students for advanced or supervisory roles
in the mining industry or the petroleum industry; and
``(C) grants either an associate's degree or a
baccalaureate degree in one of the subjects listed in
subparagraph (A);
``(2) the presence of a program, including a secondary
school vocational education program or career academy, that
provides training for individuals entering the petroleum,
coal mining, or mineral mining industries; or
``(3) the presence of a State-approved program of career
technical education at a secondary school, offered
cooperatively with a community college in one of the
industrial sectors of--
``(A) agriculture, forestry, or fisheries;
``(B) utilities;
``(C) construction;
``(D) manufacturing; and
``(E) transportation and warehousing.
``(c) Schools or institutions receiving funds under this
section must show evidence of an institutional commitment for
the purposes of career technical education and provide
evidence that the school or institution has received or will
receive industry cooperation in the form of equipment,
employee time, or donations of funds to support the
activities that are within the scope of this section.
``(d) Schools or institutions receiving funds under this
section must agree to maintain the programs for which the
funding is sought for a period of 10 years beginning on the
date the school or institution receives such funds, unless
the Secretary finds that a shorter period of time is
appropriate for the local labor market or is required by
State authorities.
``(e) Schools or institutions receiving funds under this
section may combine these funds with State funds, and other
Federal funds where allowed by law, to carry out programs
described in this section, however the use of the funds
received under this section must be reported to the Secretary
not less than annually.
``SEC. 13. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR WORKFORCE ENHANCEMENT.
``(a) Physical Science, Engineering and Technology
Scholarship Program.--
``(1) From the funds made available to carry out this
section, the Secretary shall use 30 percent of that amount to
provide financial assistance for education in physical
sciences, engineering, and engineering or industrial
technology and disciplines that, as determined by the
Secretary, are critical to the functions of the Department of
the Interior and are needed in the Department of the Interior
workforce.
``(2) The Secretary of the Interior may award a scholarship
in accordance with this section to a person who--
``(A) is a citizen of the United States;
``(B) is pursuing an undergraduate or advanced degree in a
critical skill or discipline described in paragraph (1) at an
institution of higher education; and
``(C) enters into a service agreement with the Secretary of
the Interior as described in subsection (e).
[[Page H4857]]
``(3) The amount of the financial assistance provided under
a scholarship awarded to a person under this subsection shall
be the amount determined by the Secretary of the Interior as
being necessary to pay all educational expenses incurred by
that person, including tuition, fees, cost of books,
laboratory expenses, and expenses of room and board. The
expenses paid, however, shall be limited to those educational
expenses normally incurred by students at the institution of
higher education involved.
``(b) Scholarship Program for Students Attending Minority
Serving Higher Education Institutions.--
``(1) From the funds made available to carry out this
section, the Secretary shall use 25 percent of that amount to
award scholarships in accordance with this section to persons
who--
``(A) are enrolled in a Minority Serving Higher Education
Institutions.
``(B) are citizens of the United States;
``(C) are pursuing an undergraduate or advanced degree in
agriculture, engineering, engineering or industrial
technology, or physical sciences, or other discipline that is
found by the Secretary to be critical to the functions of the
Department of the Interior and are needed in the Department
of the Interior workforce; and
``(D) enter into a service agreement with the Secretary of
the Interior as described in subsection (e).
``(2) The amount of the financial assistance provided under
a scholarship awarded to a person under this subsection shall
be the amount determined by the Secretary of the Interior as
being necessary to pay all educational expenses incurred by
that person, including tuition, fees, cost of books,
laboratory expenses, and expenses of room and board. The
expenses paid, however, shall be limited to those educational
expenses normally incurred by students at the institution of
higher education involved.
``(c) Education Partnerships With Minority Serving Higher
Education Institutions.--
``(1) The Secretary shall require the director of each
Bureau and Office, to foster the participation of Minority
Serving Higher Education Institutions in any regulatory
activity, land management activity, science activity,
engineering or industrial technology activity, or engineering
activity carried out by the Department of the Interior.
``(2) From the funds made available to carry out this
section, the Secretary shall use 25 percent of that amount to
support activities at Minority Serving Higher Education
Institutions by--
``(A) funding faculty and students in these institutions in
collaborative research projects that are directly related to
the Departmental or Bureau missions;
``(B) allowing equipment transfer to Minority Serving
Higher Education Institutions as a part of a collaborative
research program directly related to a Departmental or Bureau
mission;
``(C) allowing faculty and students at these Minority
Serving Higher Education Institutions to participate
Departmental and Bureau training activities;
``(D) funding paid internships in Departmental and Bureau
facilities for students at Minority Serving Higher Education
Institutions;
``(E) assigning Departmental and Bureau personnel to
positions located at Minority Serving Higher Educational
Institutions to serve as mentors to students interested in a
science, technology or engineering disciplines related to the
mission of the Department or the Bureaus.
``(d) Kindergarten Through Grade Twelve Science Education
Enhancement Program.--
``(1) From the funds made available to carry out this
section, the Secretary shall use 20 percent of that amount to
support activities designed to enhance the knowledge and
expertise of teachers of basic sciences, mathematics,
engineering and technology in Kindergarten through Grade
Twelve programs.
``(2) The Secretary is authorized to--
``(A) support competitive events for students under the
supervision of teachers that are designed to encourage
student interest and knowledge in science, engineering,
technology and mathematics;
``(B) support competitively-awarded, peer-reviewed programs
to promote professional development for mathematics, science,
engineering and technology teachers who teach in grades from
kindergarten through grade 12;
``(C) support summer internships at Department facilities,
for mathematics, science, engineering and technology teachers
who teach in grades from kindergarten through grade 12; and
``(D) sponsor and assist in sponsoring educational and
teacher training activities in subject areas identified as
critical skills.
``(e) Service Agreement for Recipients of Assistance.--
``(1) To receive financial assistance under subsection (a)
and subsection (b) of this section--
``(A) in the case of an employee of the Department of the
Interior, the employee shall enter into a written agreement
to continue in the employment of the department for the
period of obligated service determined under paragraph (2);
and
``(B) in the case of a person not an employee of the
Department of the Interior, the person shall enter into a
written agreement to accept and continue employment in the
Department of the Interior for the period of obligated
service determined under paragraph (2).
``(2) For the purposes of this section, the period of
obligated service for a recipient of a scholarship under this
section shall be the period determined by the Secretary of
the Interior as being appropriate to obtain adequate service
in exchange for the financial assistance provided under the
scholarship. In no event may the period of service required
of a recipient be less than the total period of pursuit of a
degree that is covered by the scholarship. The period of
obligated service is in addition to any other period for
which the recipient is obligated to serve in the civil
service of the United States.
``(3) An agreement entered into under this subsection by a
person pursuing an academic degree shall include any terms
and conditions that the Secretary of the Interior determines
necessary to protect the interests of the United States or
otherwise appropriate for carrying out this section.
``(f) Refund for Period of Unserved Obligated Service.--
``(1) A person who voluntarily terminates service before
the end of the period of obligated service required under an
agreement entered into under subsection (e) shall refund to
the United States an amount determined by the Secretary of
the Interior as being appropriate to obtain adequate service
in exchange for financial assistance.
``(2) An obligation to reimburse the United States imposed
under paragraph (1) is for all purposes a debt owed to the
United States.
``(3) The Secretary of the Interior may waive, in whole or
in part, a refund required under paragraph (1) if the
Secretary determines that recovery would be against equity
and good conscience or would be contrary to the best
interests of the United States.
``(4) A discharge in bankruptcy under title 11, United
States Code, that is entered less than five years after the
termination of an agreement under this section does not
discharge the person signing such agreement from a debt
arising under such agreement or under this subsection.
``(g) Relationship to Other Programs.--The Secretary of the
Interior shall coordinate the provision of financial
assistance under the authority of this section with the
provision of financial assistance under the authorities
provided in this Act in order to maximize the benefits
derived by the Department of Interior from the exercise of
all such authorities.
``(h) Report.--Not later than September 1 of each year, the
Secretary of the Interior shall submit to the Committee on
Resources of the House of Representatives and the Committee
on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate a report on the
status of the assistance program carried out under this
section. The report shall describe the programs within the
Department designed to recruit and retain a workforce on a
short-term basis and on a long-term basis.
``(i) Definitions.--As used in this section:
``(1) The term `Minority Serving Higher Education
Institutions' means a Hispanic-serving institution,
historically Black college or university, Alaska Native-
serving institution, or tribal college.
``(2) The term `Hispanic-serving institution' has the
meaning given the term in section 502(a) of the Higher
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1101a(a)).
``(3) The term `historically Black college or university'
has the meaning given the term `part B institution' in
section 322 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
1061).
``(4) The term `tribal college' has the meaning given the
term `tribally controlled college or university' in section
2(a) of the Tribally Controlled College Assistance Act of
1978 (25 U.S.C. 1801(a)).
``(5) The term `institution of higher education' has the
meaning given such term in section 101 of the Higher
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001).
``(6) The term `Alaska Native-serving institution' has the
meaning given the term in section 317 of the Higher Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1059d).
``(j) Funding.--The Secretary shall spend 3 percent of the
annual outlay under this Act to implement this section not to
exceed $10,000,000.''.
SEC. 24. ONSHORE AND OFFSHORE MINERAL LEASE FEES.
Except as otherwise provided in this Act, the Department of
the Interior is prohibited from charging fees applicable to
actions on Federal onshore and offshore oil and gas, coal,
geothermal, and other mineral leases, including
transportation of any production from such leases, if such
fees were not established in final regulations prior to the
date of issuance of the lease.
SEC. 25. OCS REGIONAL HEADQUARTERS.
The headquarters for the Gulf of Mexico Region shall
permanently be located within the State of Louisiana within
25 miles of the center of Jackson Square, New Orleans,
Louisiana. Further, not later than July 1, 2008, the
Secretary of the Interior shall establish the headquarters
for the Atlantic OCS Region and the headquarters for the
Pacific OCS Region within a State bordering the Atlantic OCS
Region and a State bordering the Pacific OCS Region,
respectively, from among the States bordering those Regions,
that petitions by no later than January 1, 2008, for leasing,
for oil and gas or natural gas, covering at least 40 percent
of the area of its Adjacent Zone within 100 miles of the
coastline. Such Atlantic and Pacific OCS Regions headquarters
shall be located within 25 miles of the coastline and each
MMS OCS regional headquarters shall be the permanent duty
station for all Minerals Management Service personnel that on
a daily basis spend on average 60 percent or more of their
time in performance of duties in support of the activities of
the respective Region, except that the Minerals Management
Service may house regional inspection staff in other
locations. Each OCS Region shall each be led by a Regional
Director who shall be an employee within the Senior Executive
Service.
SEC. 26. NATIONAL GEO FUND ACT OF 2006.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the
``National Geo Fund Act of 2006''.
(b) Purposes.--The purpose of this section is to--
(1) establish a fund to provide funding for the management
of geologic programs, geologic mapping, geophysical and other
seismic studies, seismic monitoring programs, and the
preservation
[[Page H4858]]
and use of geologic and geophysical data, geothermal and
geopressure energy resource management, unconventional energy
resources management, and renewable energy management
associated with ocean wave, current, and thermal resources;
(2) make available receipts derived from sales, bonus bids,
royalties, and fees from onshore and offshore gas, minerals,
oil, and any additional form of energy exploration and
development under the laws of the United States for the
purposes of the such fund;
(3) distribute funds from such fund each fiscal year to the
Secretary of the Interior and the States; and
(4) use the distributed funds to manage activities
conducted under this section, and to secure the necessary
trained workforce, contractual services, and other support,
including maintenance and capital investments, to perform the
functions and activities described in paragraph (1).
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Geo fund.--The term ``Geo Fund'' means the National Geo
Fund established by subsection (d).
(2) State.--The term ``State'' means the agency of a State
designated by its Governor or State law to perform the
functions and activities described in subsection (b)(1).
(d) Establishment and Use of the Geo Fund.--
(1) Geo fund.--There is established in the Treasury a
separate account to be known as the ``National Geo Fund''.
(2) Funding.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall deposit
in the Geo Fund--
(A) such sums as are provided by sections 9(b)(5)(A)(iv),
9(b)(5)(B)(iv), 9(c)(4)(A)(iv), and 9(c)(4)(B)(iv) of the
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, as amended by this Act;
(B)(i) during the period of October 1, 2006, through
September 30, 2015, one percent of all sums paid into the
Treasury under section 35 of the Mineral Leasing Act (30
U.S.C. 191), and
(ii) beginning October 1, 2015, and thereafter, 2.5 percent
of all sums paid into the Treasury under section 35 of the
Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 191);
(C)(i) during the period of October 1, 2006, through
September 30, 2015, one percent of all sums paid into the
Treasury from receipts derived from bonus bids and royalties
from other mineral leasing on public lands, and
(ii) beginning October 1, 2015, and thereafter, 2.5 percent
of all sums paid into the Treasury from receipts derived from
bonus bids and royalties from other mineral leasing on public
lands; and
(D) $65,000,000 from outer Continental Shelf bonus bids,
royalties, and conservation of resources fees received in
fiscal year 2007, and $50,000,000 from outer Continental
Shelf bonus bids, royalties, and conservation of resources
fees received in each of fiscal years 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011,
2012, and 2013, 75 percent of which shall be used to
implement subsection (g) and all of which shall remain
available until expended.
(3) Investments.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall
invest the amounts deposited under paragraph (2) and all
accrued interest on the amounts deposited under paragraph (2)
only in interest bearing obligations of the United States or
in obligations guaranteed as to both principal and interest
by the United States.
(4) Availability to secretary of the interior.--
(A) In general.--Beginning with fiscal year 2007, and in
each fiscal year thereafter, one-third of amounts deposited
into the Geo Fund, unless otherwise specified herein,
together with the interest thereon, shall be available,
without fiscal year limitations, to the Secretary of the
Interior for use for the purposes described in subsection
(b)(4).
(B) Withdrawals and transfer of funds.--The Secretary of
the Treasury shall withdraw such amounts from the Geo Fund as
the Secretary of the Interior may request, subject to the
limitation in subparagraph (A), and transfer such amounts to
the Secretary of the Interior to be used, at the discretion
of the Secretary of the Interior, by the Minerals Management
Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and the United States
Geological Survey for the purposes described in subsection
(b)(4). No funds distributed from the Geo Fund may be used to
purchase an interest in land.
(5) Payment to states.--
(A) In general.--Beginning with fiscal year 2007, and in
each fiscal year thereafter, two-thirds of amounts deposited
into the Geo Fund, unless otherwise specified herein,
together with the interest thereon, shall be available,
without fiscal year limitations, to the States for use for
the purposes described in subsection (b)(4).
(B) Withdrawals and transfer of funds.--Within the first 90
days of each fiscal year, the Secretary of the Treasury shall
withdraw amounts from the Geo Fund and transfer such amounts
to the States based on a formula devised by the Secretary of
the Interior based on the relative needs of the States and
the needs of the Nation.
(C) Use of payments by states.--Each State shall use the
payments made under subparagraph (B) only for carrying out
projects and programs for the purposes described in
subsection (b)(4). No funds distributed from the Geo Fund may
be used to purchase an interest in land.
(D) Encouragement of use of private funds by states.--Each
State shall use the payments made under subparagraph (B) to
leverage private funds for carrying out projects for the
purposes described in subsection (b)(4).
(E) Report to congress.--Beginning in fiscal year 2008 and
continuing for each fiscal year thereafter, the Secretary of
the Interior and each State receiving funds from the Geo Fund
shall submit a report to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources of the Senate and the Committee on Resources of the
House of Representatives. Reports submitted to the Congress
by the Secretary of the Interior and the States shall include
detailed information regarding expenditures during the
previous fiscal year.
(e) Strategic Unconventional Resources.--
(1) Program.--The Secretary of the Interior shall establish
a program for production of fuels from strategic
unconventional resources, and production of oil and gas
resources using CO2 enhanced recovery. The program shall
focus initially on activities and domestic resources most
likely to result in significant production in the near
future, and shall include work necessary to improve
extraction techniques, including surface and in situ
operations. The program shall include characterization and
assessment of potential resources, a sampling program,
appropriate laboratory and other analyses and testing, and
assessment of methods for exploration and development of
these strategic unconventional resources.
(2) Pilot projects.--The program created in paragraph (1)
shall include, but not be limited to, pilot projects on (A)
the Maverick Basin heavy oil and tar sands formations of
Texas, including the San Miguel deposits, (B) the Greater
Green River Basin heavy oil, oil shale, tar sands, and coal
deposits of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming, (C) the shale, tar
sands, heavy oil, and coal deposits in the Alabama-
Mississippi-Tennessee region, (D) the shale, tar sands, heavy
oil, and coal deposits in the Ohio River valley, and (E)
strategic unconventional resources in California. The
Secretary shall identify and report to Congress on feasible
incentives to foster recovery of unconventional fuels by
private industry within the United States. Such incentives
may include, but are not limited to, long-term contracts for
the purchase of unconventional fuels for defense purposes,
Federal grants and loan guarantees for necessary capital
expenditures, and favorable terms for the leasing of
Government lands containing unconventional resources.
(3) Definitions.--In this subsection:
(A) Strategic unconventional resources.--The term
``strategic unconventional resources'' means hydrocarbon
resources, including heavy oil, oil shale, tar sands, and
coal deposits, from which liquid fuels may be produced.
(B) In situ extraction methods.--The term ``in situ
extraction methods'' means recovery techniques that are
applied to the resources while they are still in the ground,
and are in commercial use or advanced stages of development.
Such techniques include, but are not limited to, steam
flooding, steam-assisted gravity drainage (including
combination with electric power generation where
appropriate), cyclic steam stimulation, air injection, and
chemical treatment.
(4) Funding.--The Secretary shall carry out the program for
the production of strategic unconventional fuels with funds
from the Geo Fund in each of fiscal years 2007 through 2011
in the amount of not less than $35,000,000 each year. Each
pilot project shall be allocated not less than $4,000,000 per
year in each of fiscal years 2007 through 2011.
(f) Support of Geothermal and Geopressure Oil and Gas
Energy Production.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall carry out a grant
program in support of geothermal and geopressure oil and gas
energy production. The program shall include grants for a
total of not less than three assessments of the use of
innovative geothermal techniques such as organic rankine
cycle systems at marginal, unproductive, and productive oil
and gas wells, and not less than one assessment of the use of
innovative geopressure techniques. The Secretary shall, to
the extent practicable and in the public interest, make
awards that--
(A) include not less than five oil or gas well sites per
project award;
(B) use a range of oil or gas well hot water source
temperatures from 150 degrees Fahrenheit to 300 degrees
Fahrenheit;
(C) use existing or new oil or gas wells;
(D) cover a range of sizes from 175 kilowatts to one
megawatt;
(E) are located at a range of sites including tribal lands,
Federal lease, State, or privately owned sites;
(F) can be replicated at a wide range of sites;
(G) facilitate identification of optimum techniques among
competing alternatives;
(H) include business commercialization plans that have the
potential for production of equipment at high volumes and
operation and support at a large number of sites; and
(I) satisfy other criteria that the Secretary determines
are necessary to carry out the program.
The Secretary shall give preference to assessments that
address multiple elements contained in subparagraphs (A)
through (I).
(2) Grant awards.--
(A) In general.--Each grant award for assessment of
innovative geothermal or geopressure technology such as
organic rankine cycle systems at oil and gas wells made by
the Secretary under this section shall include--
(i) necessary and appropriate site engineering study;
(ii) detailed economic assessment of site specific
conditions;
(iii) appropriate feasibility studies to determine ability
for replication;
(iv) design or adaptation of existing technology for site
specific circumstances or conditions;
(v) installation of equipment, service, and support; and
(vi) monitoring for a minimum of one year after
commissioning date.
(3) Competitive grant selection.--Not less than 180 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary
shall conduct a national solicitation for applications for
grants under the program. Grant recipients shall be selected
on a competitive basis based on criteria in subsection (b).
[[Page H4859]]
(4) Federal share.--The Federal share of costs of grants
under this subsection shall be provided from funds made
available to carry out this section. The Federal share of the
cost of a project carried out with such a grant shall not
exceed 50 percent of such cost.
(5) Funding.--The Secretary shall carry out the grant
program under this subsection with funds from the Geo Fund in
each of fiscal years 2007 through 2011 in the amount of not
less than $5,000,000 each fiscal year. No funds authorized
under this section may be used for the purposes of drilling
new wells.
(6) Amendment.--Section 4 of the Geothermal Steam Act of
1970 (30 USC 1003) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(h) Geothermal Resources Co-Produced With the Minerals.--
Any person who holds a lease or who operates a cooperative or
unit plan under the Mineral Leasing Act, in the absence of an
existing lease for geothermal resources under this Act, shall
upon notice to the Secretary have the right to utilize any
geothermal resources co-produced with the minerals for which
the lease was issued during the operation of that lease or
cooperative or unit plan, for the generating of electricity
to operate the lease. Any electricity that is produced in
excess of that which is required to operate the lease and
that is sold for purposes outside of the boundary of the
lease shall be subject to the requirements of section 5.''
(g) Liquid Fuels Grant Program.--
(1) Program.--The Secretary of the Interior shall establish
a grant program for facilities for coal-to-liquids, petroleum
coke-to-liquids, oil shale, tar sands, heavy oil, and Alaska
natural gas-to-liquids and to assess the production of low-
rank coal water fuel (in this subsection referred to as
``LRCWF'').
(2) LRCWF.--The LRCWF grant project location shall use
lignite coal from fields near the Tombigbee River within 60
miles of a land-grant college and shall be allocated
$15,000,000 for expenditure during fiscal year 2007.
(3) Definitions.--In this subsection:
(A) Coal-to-liquids front-end engineering and design.--The
terms ``coal-to-liquids front-end engineering and design''
and ``FEED'' mean those expenditures necessary to engineer,
design, and obtain permits for a facility for a particular
geographic location which will utilize a process or technique
to produce liquid fuels from coal resources.
(B) Low-rank coal water fuel.--In this subsection the term
``low-rank coal water fuel'' means a liquid fuel produced
from hydrothermal treatment of lignite and sub-bituminous
coals.
(4) Grant provisions.--All grants shall require a 50
percent non-Federal cost share. The first 4 FEED grant
recipients who receive full project construction financing
commitments, based on earliest calendar date, shall not be
required to repay any of their grants. The next 4 FEED grant
recipients who receive such commitments shall be required to
repay 25 percent of the grant. The next 4 FEED grant
recipients who receive such commitments shall be required to
repay 50 percent of the grant, and the remaining FEED grant
recipeints shall be required to repay 75 percent of the
grant. The LRCWF recipient shall not be required to repay the
grant. Any required repayment shall be paid as part of the
closing process for any construction financing relating to
the grant. No repayment shall require the payment of interest
if repaid within 5 years of the issuance of the grant. FEED
grants shall be be limited to a maximum of $1,000,000 per
1,000 barrels per day of liquid fuels production capacity,
not to exceed $25 million per year.
(5) Funding.--The Secretary shall carry out the grant
program established by this subsection with funds from the
Geo Fund.
(h) Renewable Energy From Ocean Wave, Current, and Thermal
Resources.--
(1) Program.--The Secretary of the Interior shall establish
a grant program for the production of renewable energy from
ocean waves, currents, and thermal resources.
(2) Grant provisions.--All grants under this subsection
shall require a 50 percent non-Federal cost share.
(3) Funding.--The Secretary shall carry out this grant
program with funds from the Geo Fund in each of fiscal years
2007 through 2011 in the amount of not less than $6,000,000
each year, and thereafter in such amounts as the Secretary
may find appropriate.
(i) Amendment to the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation
Act of 1977.--Section 517 of the Surface Mining Control and
Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 1267) is amended by adding
adding at the end the following:
``(i) Any person who provides the regulatory authority with
a map under subsection (b)(1) shall not be liable to any
other person in any way for the accuracy or completeness of
any such map which was not prepared and certified by or on
behalf of such person.''.
SEC. 27. LEASES FOR AREAS LOCATED WITHIN 100 MILES OF
CALIFORNIA OR FLORIDA.
(a) Authorization to Cancel and Exchange Certain Existing
Oil and Gas Leases; Prohibition on Submittal of Exploration
Plans for Certain Leases Prior to June 30, 2010.--
(1) Authority.--Within 2 years after the date of enactment
of this Act, the lessee of an existing oil and gas lease for
an area located completely within 100 miles of the coastline
within the California or Florida Adjacent Zones shall have
the option, without compensation, of exchanging such lease
for a new oil and gas lease having a primary term of 5 years.
For the area subject to the new lease, the lessee may select
any unleased tract on the outer Continental Shelf that is in
an area available for leasing. Further, with the permission
of the relevant Governor, such a lessee may convert its
existing oil and gas lease into a natural gas lease having a
primary term of 5 years and covering the same area as the
existing lease or another area within the same State's
Adjacent Zone within 100 miles of the coastline.
(2) Administrative process.--The Secretary of the Interior
shall establish a reasonable administrative process to
implement paragraph (1). Exchanges and conversions under
subsection (a), including the issuance of new leases, shall
not be considered to be major Federal actions for purposes of
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321
et seq.). Further, such actions conducted in accordance with
this section are deemed to be in compliance all provisions of
the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 et
seq.).
(3) Operating restrictions.--A new lease issued in exchange
for an existing lease under this section shall be subject to
such national defense operating stipulations on the OCS tract
covered by the new lease as may be applicable upon issuance.
(4) Priority.--The Secretary shall give priority in the
lease exchange process based on the amount of the original
bonus bid paid for the issuance of each lease to be
exchanged. The Secretary shall allow leases covering partial
tracts to be exchanged for leases covering full tracts
conditioned upon payment of additional bonus bids on a per-
acre basis as determined by the average per acre of the
original bonus bid per acre for the partial tract being
exchanged.
(5) Exploration plans.--Any exploration plan submitted to
the Secretary of the Interior after the date of the enactment
of this Act and before July 1, 2010, for an oil and gas lease
for an area wholly within 100 miles of the coastline within
the California Adjacent Zone or Florida Adjacent Zone shall
not be treated as received by the Secretary until the earlier
of July 1, 2010, or the date on which a petition by the
Adjacent State for oil and gas leasing covering the area
within which is located the area subject to the oil and gas
lease was approved.
(b) Further Lease Cancellation and Exchange Provisions.--
(1) Cancellation of lease.--As part of the lease exchange
process under this section, the Secretary shall cancel a
lease that is exchanged under this section.
(2) Consent of lessees.--All lessees holding an interest in
a lease must consent to cancellation of their leasehold
interests in order for the lease to be cancelled and
exchanged under this section.
(3) Waiver of rights.--As a prerequisite to the exchange of
a lease under this section, the lessee must waive any rights
to bring any litigation against the United States related to
the transaction.
(4) Plugging and abandonment.--The plugging and abandonment
requirements for any wells located on any lease to be
cancelled and exchanged under this section must be complied
with by the lessees prior to the cancellation and exchange.
(c) Area Partially Within 100 Miles of Florida.--An
existing oil and gas lease for an area located partially
within 100 miles of the coastline within the Florida n
Adjacent Zone may only be developed and produced using wells
drilled from well-head locations at least 100 miles from the
coastline to any bottom-hole location on the area of the
lease. This subsection shall not apply if Florida has
petitioned for leasing closer to the coastline than 100
miles.
(d) Existing Oil and Gas Lease Defined.--In this section
the term ``existing oil and gas lease'' means an oil and gas
lease in effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 28. COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE.
Section 31 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1356a) is repealed.
SEC. 29. OIL SHALE AND TAR SANDS AMENDMENTS.
(a) Repeal of Requirement to Establish Payments.--Section
369(o) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-58;
119 Stat. 728; 42 U.S.C. 15927) is repealed.
(b) Treatment of Revenues.--Section 21 of the Mineral
Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 241) is amended by adding at the end
the following:
``(e) Revenues.--
``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding the provisions of
section 35, all revenues received from and under an oil shale
or tar sands lease shall be disposed of as provided in this
subsection.
``(2) Royalty rates for commercial leases.--
``(A) Royalty rates.--The Secretary shall model the royalty
schedule for oil shale and tar sands leases based on the
royalty program currently in effect for the production of
synthetic crude oil from oil sands in the Province of
Alberta, Canada.
``(B) Reduction.--The Secretary shall reduce any royalty
otherwise required to be paid under subparagraph (A) under
any oil shale or tar sands lease on a sliding scale based
upon market price, with a 10 percent reduction if the average
futures price of NYMEX Light Sweet Crude, or a similar index,
drops, for the previous quarter year, below $50 (in January
1, 2006, dollars), and an 80 percent reduction if the average
price drops below $30 (in January 1, 2006, dollars) for the
quarter previous to the one in which the production is sold.
``(3) Disposition of revenues.--
``(A) Deposit.--The Secretary shall deposit into a separate
account in the Treasury all revenues derived from any oil
shale or tar sands lease.
``(B) Allocations to states and local political
subdivisions.--The Secretary shall allocate 50 percent of the
revenues deposited into the account established under
subparagraph (A) to the State within the boundaries of which
the leased lands are located, with a portion of that to be
paid directly by the Secretary to the State's local political
subdivisions as provided in this paragraph.
``(C) Transmission of allocations.--
``(i) In general.--Not later than the last business day of
the month after the month in which
[[Page H4860]]
the revenues were received, the Secretary shall transmit--
``(I) to each State two-thirds of such State's allocations
under subparagraph (B), and in accordance with clauses (ii)
and (iii) to certain county-equivalent and municipal
political subdivisions of such State a total of one-third of
such State's allocations under subparagraph (B), together
with all accrued interest thereon; and
``(II) the remaining balance of such revenues deposited
into the account that are not allocated under subparagraph
(B), together with interest thereon, shall be transmitted to
the miscellaneous receipts account of the Treasury, except
that until a lease has been in production for 20 years 50
percent of such remaining balance derived from a lease shall
be paid in accordance with subclause (I).
``(ii) Allocations to certain county-equivalent political
subdivisions.--The Secretary shall under clause (i)(I) make
equitable allocations of the revenues to county-equivalent
political subdivisions that the Secretary determines are
closely associated with the leasing and production of oil
shale and tar sands, under a formula that the Secretary shall
determine by regulation.
``(iii) Allocations to municipal political subdivisions.--
The initial allocation to each county-equivalent political
subdivision under clause (ii) shall be further allocated to
the county-equivalent political subdivision and any municipal
political subdivisions located partially or wholly within the
boundaries of the county-equivalent political subdivision on
an equitable basis under a formula that the Secretary shall
determine by regulation.
``(D) Investment of deposits.--The deposits in the Treasury
account established under this section shall be invested by
the Secretary of the Treasury in securities backed by the
full faith and credit of the United States having maturities
suitable to the needs of the account and yielding the highest
reasonably available interest rates as determined by the
Secretary of the Treasury.
``(E) Use of funds.--A recipient of funds under this
subsection may use the funds for any lawful purpose as
determined by State law. Funds allocated under this
subsection to States and local political subdivisions may be
used as matching funds for other Federal programs without
limitation. Funds allocated to local political subdivisions
under this subsection may not be used in calculation of
payments to such local political subdivisions under programs
for payments in lieu of taxes or other similar programs.
``(F) No accounting required.--No recipient of funds under
this subsection shall be required to account to the Federal
Government for the expenditure of such funds, except as
otherwise may be required by law.
``(4) Definitions.--In this subsection:
``(A) County-equivalent political subdivision.--The term
`county-equivalent political subdivision' means a political
jurisdiction immediately below the level of State government,
including a county, parish, borough in Alaska, independent
municipality not part of a county, parish, or borough in
Alaska, or other equivalent subdivision of a State.
``(B) Municipal political subdivision.--The term `municipal
political subdivision' means a municipality located within
and part of a county, parish, borough in Alaska, or other
equivalent subdivision of a State.''.
SEC. 30. AVAILABILITY OF OCS RECEIPTS TO PROVIDE PAYMENTS
UNDER SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITY SELF-
DETERMINATION ACT OF 2000.
Section 9 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1338) is amended by inserting after subsection (i), as
added by section 7 of this Act, the following new subsection:
``(j) Availability of Funds for Payments Under Secure Rural
Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of this section,
$50,000,000 of OCS Receipts shall be available to the
Secretary of the Treasury for each of fiscal years 2007
through 2012 to make payments under sections 102 and 103 of
the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act
of 2000 (Public Law 106-393; 16 U.S.C. 500 note). The
Secretary of the Treasury shall use the funds made available
by this subsection to make such payments in lieu of using
funds in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, as
otherwise authorized by sections 102(b)(3) and 103(b)(2) of
such Act.''.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. No amendment to the committee amendment is in
order except those printed in House Report 109-540. Each amendment may
be offered only in the order printed in the report, by a Member
designated in the report, shall be considered read, shall be debatable
for the time specified in the report, equally divided and controlled by
the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and
shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question.
Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Pombo
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1
printed in House Report 109-540.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment made in order under
House Resolution 897.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 1 offered by Mr. Pombo:
Page 12, line 4, strike ``December 1, 1996, through
December 31, 2000,'' and insert ``January 1, 1998, through
December 31, 1999,''.
Page 12, line 18, strike subsection (t).
Page 13, line 19, strike ``not less than $1.00 nor more
than $4.00'' and insert ``$3.75''.
Page 16, line 8, strike ``6.0'' and insert ``4.6''.
Page 16, line 9, strike ``7.0'' and insert ``5.95''.
Page 16, line 10, strike ``8.0'' and insert ``6.8''.
Page 16, line 11, strike ``9.0'' and insert ``7.65''.
Page 16, line 12, strike ``12.0'' and insert ``10.20''.
Page 16, line 13, strike ``15.0'' and insert ``12.75''.
Page 16, line 15, strike ``18.0'' and insert ``15.30''.
Page 16, line 17, strike ``21.0'' and insert ``17.85''.
Page 16, line 19, strike ``24.0'' and insert ``20.40''.
Page 16, line 21, strike ``27.0'' and insert ``22.95''.
Page 16, line 22, strike ``30.0'' and insert ``25.50''.
Page 16, line 24, strike ``33.0'' and insert ``28.05''.
Page 17, line 1, strike ``36.0'' and insert ``30.60''.
Page 17, line 3, strike ``39.0'' and insert ``33.15''.
Page 17, line 5, strike ``42.0'' and insert ``35.70''.
Page 17, line 7, strike ``45.0'' and insert ``38.25''.
Page 17, line 10, strike ``50.0'' and insert ``42.50''.
Page 17, line 17, strike ``50'' and insert ``42.50''.
Page 17, line 23, strike the existing paragraph (4) and
insert the following:
``(4) Receipts sharing from tracts within 4 marine leagues
of any coastline.--
``(A) Areas described in paragraph (2).--
``(i) Beginning October 1, 2005, and continuing through
September 30, 2010, the Secretary shall share 25 percent of
OCS Receipts derived from all leases located within 4 marine
leagues from any coastline within areas described in
paragraph (2). For each fiscal year after September 30, 2010,
the Secretary shall increase the percent shared in 5 percent
increments each fiscal year until the sharing rate for all
leases located within 4 marine leagues from any coastline
within areas described in paragraph (2) becomes 42.5 percent.
``(ii) During fiscal year 2016, the Secretary shall conduct
an analysis of all of the areas described in paragraph (3)
and subsection (c)(3) to determine the total of OCS Receipts
derived from such areas during the period of fiscal year 2007
through fiscal year 2016. The Secretary shall subtract the
amount of $4 billion from the total of such OCS Receipts. If
the result is a positive number, the Secretary shall divide
such positive number by $4 billion. The resulting quotient,
not to exceed 0.5, shall then be multiplied times 25. The
product of such multiplication shall be added to 42.5 and the
sum shall be the percent that the Secretary shall share for
fiscal year 2017 and all future years from OCS Receipts
derived from all leases located within 4 marine leagues from
any coastline within areas described in paragraph (2), unless
increased by the provisions of (iii).
``(iii) Beginning October 1, 2017, the Secretary shall
share, in addition to the share established by (i), as
modified by (ii) if any, amounts determined as follows, with
the total of the amounts shared under this paragraph not to
exceed in any fiscal year an amount equal to 63.75 percent of
total OCS Receipts derived from all leases located within 4
marine leagues from any coastline within areas described in
paragraph (2)--25 percent of the total of OCS Receipts
derived from areas described in paragraph (3) and subsection
(c)(3) that exceed the following amounts for the fiscal year
indicated: for fiscal year 2017 the amount of $900,000,000
and for each fiscal year thereafter add $100,000,000. Amounts
added under this clause to be shared, if any, for any fiscal
year shall be added to the sharing base for all subsequent
years and shall be allocated among State Adjacent Zones on a
basis proportional to the result from the calculation in
clause (i).
``(B) Areas not described in paragraph (2).--Beginning
October 1, 2005, the Secretary shall share 63.75 percent of
OCS receipts derived from all leases located completely or
partially within 4 marine leagues from any coastline within
areas not described paragraph (2).''.
Page 18, beginning at line 11, strike ``as follows:'' and
all that follows through line 22 and insert ``to the Adjacent
State.''.
Page 19, beginning at line 2, strike ``as follows:'' and
all that follows through line 3 and insert ``to the Adjacent
State''.
Page 19, lines 12 through 19, redesignate the quoted
subclauses (I) and (II) as clauses (i) and (ii), and move
such clauses 2 ems to the left.
Page 19, strike line 20 and all that follows through page
20, line 6.
Page 21, line 17, strike ``6.0'' and insert ``4.6''.
Page 21, line 18, strike ``7.0'' and insert ``5.95''.
Page 21, line 19, strike ``8.0'' and insert ``6.80''.
Page 21, line 20, strike ``9.0'' and insert ``7.65''.
Page 21, line 21, strike ``12.0'' and insert ``10.20''.
Page 21, line 22, strike ``15.0'' and insert ``12.75''.
Page 21, line 24, strike ``18'' and insert ``15.30''.
[[Page H4861]]
Page 22, line 1, strike ``21.0'' and insert ``17.85''.
Page 22, line 3, strike ``24.0'' and insert ``20.40''.
Page 22, line 5, strike ``27.0'' and insert ``22.95''.
Page 22, line 6, strike ``30.0'' and insert ``25.50''.
Page 22, line 8, strike ``33.0'' and insert ``28.05''.
Page 22, line 10, strike ``36.0'' and insert ``30.60''.
Page 22, line 12, strike ``39.0'' and insert ``33.15''.
Page 22, line 14, strike ``42.0'' and insert ``35.70''.
Page 22, line 16, strike ``45.0'' and insert ``38.25''.
Page 22, line 19, strike ``50.0'' and insert ``42.50''.
Page 23, line 2, strike ``50'' and insert ``42.5''.
Page 23, line 6, strike the period and insert the
following: ``, except that the Secretary shall only share 25
percent of such OCS Receipts derived from all such leases
within a State's Adjacent Zone if no leasing is allowed
within any portion of that State's Adjacent Zone located
completely within 100 miles of any coastline.''.
Page 23, beginning on line 13, strike ``each fiscal year''
and all that follows through line 25 and insert ``each fiscal
year to the Adjacent State''.
Page 24, beginning at line 4, strike ``as follows:'' and
all that follows through line 5 and insert ``to the Adjacent
State''.
Page 24, lines 15 through 22, redesignate the quoted
subclauses (I) and (II) as clauses (i) and (ii), and move
such clauses 2 ems to the left.
Page 24, strike line 23 and all that follows through page
25, line 6.
Page 25, strike lines 11 through 20 and insert the
following:
``(A) to each State 60 percent of such State's allocations
under subsections (b)(5)(A), (b)(5)(B), (c)(4)(A), and
(c)(4)(B) for the immediate prior fiscal year;
``(B) to each coastal county-equivalent and municipal
political subdivisions of such State a total of 40 percent of
such State's allocations under subsections (b)(5)(A),
(b)(5)(B), (c)(4)(A), and (c)(4)(B), together with all
accrued interest thereon; and
Page 34, beginning at line 15, strike section 8.
Page 37, beginning at line 18, strike ``was initiated'' and
all that follows through the end of the sentence and insert
``is extended by a State under subsection (h)''.
Page 37, line 20, strike the period and insert the
following: ``, nor may the President withdraw from leasing
any area for which a State failed to prohibit, or petition to
prohibit, leasing under subsection (g). Further, in the area
of the outer Continental Shelf more than 100 miles from any
coastline, not more than 25 percent of the acreage of any OCS
Planning Area may be withdrawn from leasing under this
section at any point in time.''.
Page 40, line 16, insert a period after the word ``effect''
and strike the remainder of the sentence.
Page 41, line 7, strike ``June 30'' and insert ``April
30''.
Page 46, line 7, strike ``Petition for Extension Of'' and
insert ``Extend''.
Page 46, strike lines 10 through 12 and insert the
following:
``(1) In general.--A State, through its Governor and upon
the concurrence of its legislature, may''.
Page 46, line 14, strike ``petition'' and insert
``extension''.
Page 46, line 18, strike ``petition'' and insert
``extend''.
Page 46, beginning at line 20, strike ``submit separate
petitions'' and insert ``prepare separate extensions''.
Page 46, beginning at line 22, strike ``A petition of a
State may request'' and insert ``An extension by a State may
affect''.
Page 46, beginning at line 25, strike ``Petitions for
extending'' and insert ``Extensions of''.
Page 47, strike line 11 and all that follows through page
48, line 6.
Page 48, strike the close quotation marks and the following
period at line 20, and after line 20 insert the following:
``(j) Prohibition on Leasing East of the Military Mission
Line.--
``(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, from and
after the enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of
2006, no area of the outer Continental Shelf located in the
Gulf of Mexico east of the military mission line may be
offered for leasing for oil and gas or natural gas.
``(2) In this subsection, the term `military mission line'
means a line located at 86 degrees, 41minutes West Longitude,
and extending south from the coast of Florida to the outer
boundary of United States territorial waters in the Gulf of
Mexico.''.
Page 55, beginning at line 3, strike section 13.
Page 61, beginning at line 20, amend section 14 to read as
follows:
SEC. 14. FEDERAL ENERGY NATURAL RESOURCES ENHANCEMENT ACT OF
2006.
(a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
(1) Energy and minerals exploration, development, and
production on Federal onshore and offshore lands, including
bio-based fuel, natural gas, minerals, oil, geothermal, and
power from wind, waves, currents, and thermal energy,
involves significant outlays of funds by Federal and State
wildlife, fish, and natural resource management agencies for
environmental studies, planning, development, monitoring, and
management of wildlife, fish, air, water, and other natural
resources.
(2) State wildlife, fish, and natural resource management
agencies are funded primarily through permit and license fees
paid to the States by the general public to hunt and fish,
and through Federal excise taxes on equipment used for these
activities.
(3) Funds generated from consumptive and recreational uses
of wildlife, fish, and other natural resources currently are
inadequate to address the natural resources related to energy
and minerals development on Federal onshore and offshore
lands.
(4) Funds available to Federal agencies responsible for
managing Federal onshore and offshore lands and Federal-trust
wildlife and fish species and their habitats are inadequate
to address the natural resources related to energy and
minerals development on Federal onshore and offshore lands.
(5) Receipts derived from sales, bonus bids, and royalties
under the mineral leasing laws of the United States are paid
to the Treasury through the Minerals Management Service of
the Department of the Interior.
(6) None of the receipts derived from sales, bonus bids,
and royalties under the minerals leasing laws of the United
States are paid to the Federal or State agencies to examine,
monitor, and manage wildlife, fish, air, water, and other
natural resources related to natural gas, oil, and mineral
exploration and development.
(b) Purposes.--It is the purpose of this section to--
(1) authorize expenditures for the monitoring and
management of wildlife and fish, and their habitats, and air,
water, and other natural resources related to energy and
minerals development on Federal onshore and offshore lands;
(2) authorize expenditures for each fiscal year to the
Secretary of the Interior and the States; and
(3) use the appropriated funds to secure the necessary
trained workforce or contractual services to conduct
environmental studies, planning, development, monitoring, and
post-development management of wildlife and fish and their
habitats and air, water, and other natural resources that may
be related to bio-based fuel, gas, mineral, oil, wind, or
other energy exploration, development, transportation,
transmission, and associated activities on Federal onshore
and offshore lands, including, but not limited to--
(A) pertinent research, surveys, and environmental analyses
conducted to identify any impacts on wildlife, fish, air,
water, and other natural resources from energy and mineral
exploration, development, production, and transportation or
transmission;
(B) projects to maintain, improve, or enhance wildlife and
fish populations and their habitats or air, water, or other
natural resources, including activities under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973;
(C) research, surveys, environmental analyses, and projects
that assist in managing, including mitigating either onsite
or offsite, or both, the impacts of energy and mineral
activities on wildlife, fish, air, water, and other natural
resources; and
(D) projects to teach young people to live off the land.
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Enhancement program.--The term ``Enhancement Program''
means the Federal Energy Natural Resources Enhancement
Program established by this section.
(2) State.--The term ``State'' means the Governor of the
State.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out the Enhancement Program
$150,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2017.
(e) Establishment of Federal Energy Natural Resources
Enhancement Program.--
(1) In general.--There is established the Federal Energy
Natural Resources Enhancement Program.
(2) Payment to secretary of the interior.--Beginning with
fiscal year 2007, and in each fiscal year thereafter, one-
third of amounts appropriated for the Enhancement Program
shall be available to the Secretary of the Interior for use
for the purposes described in subsection (b)(3).
(3) Payment to states.--
(A) In general.--Beginning with fiscal year 2007, and in
each fiscal year thereafter, two-thirds of amounts
appropriated for the Enhancement Program shall be available
to the States for use for the purposes described in (b)(3).
(B) Use of payments by state.--Each State shall use the
payments made under this paragraph only for carrying out
projects and programs for the purposes described in (b)(3).
(C) Encourage use of private funds by state.--Each State
shall use the payments made under this paragraph to leverage
private funds for carrying out projects for the purposes
described in (b)(3).
(f) Limitation on Use.--Amounts made available under this
section may not be used for the purchase of any interest in
land.
(g) Reports to Congress.--
(1) In general.--Beginning in fiscal year 2008 and
continuing for each fiscal year thereafter, the Secretary of
the Interior and each State receiving funds from the
Enhancement Fund shall submit a report to the
[[Page H4862]]
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and
the Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives.
(2) Required information.--Reports submitted to the
Congress by the Secretary of the Interior and States under
this subsection shall include the following information
regarding expenditures during the previous fiscal year:
(A) A summary of pertinent scientific research and surveys
conducted to identify impacts on wildlife, fish, and other
natural resources from energy and mineral developments.
(B) A summary of projects planned and completed to
maintain, improve or enhance wildlife and fish populations
and their habitats or other natural resources.
(C) A list of additional actions that assist, or would
assist, in managing, including mitigating either onsite or
offsite, or both, the impacts of energy and mineral
development on wildlife, fish, and other natural resources.
(D) A summary of private (non-Federal) funds used to plan,
conduct, and complete the plans and programs identified in
paragraphs (2)(A) and (2)(B).
Page 72, line 14, insert after ``offshore,'' the
following: ``but not including any outer Continental Shelf
oil and gas leases that are subject to litigation in the
Court of Federal Claims on January 1, 2006,''.
Page 75, beginning at line 13, strike section 19.
Page 87, beginning at line 18, strike section 23 and insert
the following:
SEC. 23. MINING AND PETROLEUM SCHOOLS.
(a) Maintenance and Restoration of Existing and Historic
Petroleum and Mining Engineering Programs.--Public Law 98-409
(30 U.S.C. 1221 et seq.) is amended to read as follows:
``SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
``This Act may be cited as the `Energy and Mineral Schools
Reinvestment Act'.
``SEC. 2. POLICY.
``It is the policy of the United States to maintain the
human capital needed to preserve and foster the economic,
energy, and mineral resources security of the United States.
The petroleum and mining engineering programs and the applied
geology and geophysics programs at State chartered schools,
universities, and institutions that produce human capital are
national assets and should be assisted with Federal funds to
ensure their continued health and existence.
``SEC. 3. MAINTAINING AND RESTORING HISTORIC AND EXISTING
PETROLEUM AND MINING ENGINEERING EDUCATION
PROGRAMS.
``(a) The Secretary of the Interior (in this Act referred
to as the `Secretary') shall provide funds to historic and
existing State-chartered recognized petroleum or mining
schools to assist such schools, universities, and
institutions in maintaining programs in petroleum, mining,
and mineral engineering education and research. All funds
shall be directed only to these programs and shall be subject
to the conditions of this section. Such funds shall not be
less than 25 percent of the annual outlay of funds authorized
by section 23(d) of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of
2006.
``(b) In this Act the term `historic and existing State-
chartered recognized petroleum or mining school' means a
school, university, or educational institution with the
presence of an engineering program meeting the specific
program criteria, established by the member societies of
ABET, Inc., for petroleum, mining, or mineral engineering and
that is accredited on the date of enactment of the Deep Ocean
Energy Resources Act of 2006 by ABET, Inc.
``(c) It shall be the duty of each school, university, or
institution receiving funds under this section to provide for
and enhance the training of undergraduate and graduate
petroleum, mining, and mineral engineers through research,
investigations, demonstrations, and experiments. All such
work shall be carried out in a manner that will enhance
undergraduate education.
``(d) Each school, university, or institution receiving
funds under this Act shall maintain the program for which the
funds are provided for 10 years after the date of the first
receipt of such funds and take steps described in its
application for funding to increase the number of
undergraduate students enrolled in and completing the
programs of study in petroleum, mining, and mineral
engineering.
``(e) The research, investigation, demonstration,
experiment, and training authorized by this section may
include development and production of conventional and non-
conventional fuel resources, the production of metallic and
non-metallic mineral resources including industrial mineral
resources, and the production of stone, sand, and gravel. In
all cases the work carried out with funds made available
under this Act shall include a significant opportunity for
participation by undergraduate students.
``(f) Research funded by this Act related to energy and
mineral resource development and production may include--
``(1) studies of petroleum, mining, and mineral extraction
and immediately related beneficiation technology;
``(2) mineral economics, reclamation technology, and
practices for active operations;
``(3) the development of re-mining systems and technologies
to facilitate reclamation that fosters the ultimate recovery
of resources at abandoned petroleum, mining, and aggregate
production sites; and
``(4) research on ways to extract petroleum and mineral
resources that reduce the environmental impact of those
activities.
``(g) Grants for basic science and engineering studies and
research shall not require additional participation by
funding partners. Grants for studies to demonstrate the proof
of concept for science and engineering or the demonstration
of feasibility and implementation shall include participation
by industry and may include funding from other Federal
agencies.
``(h)(1) No funds made available under this section shall
be applied to the acquisition by purchase or lease of any
land or interests therein, or the rental, purchase,
construction, preservation, or repair of any building.
``(2) Funding made available under this section may be used
with the express approval of the Secretary for proposals that
will provide for maintaining or upgrading of existing
laboratories and laboratory equipment. Funding for such
maintenance shall not be used for university overhead
expenses.
``(3) Funding made available under this Act may be used for
maintaining and upgrading mines and oil and gas drilling rigs
owned by a school, university, or institution described in
this section that are used for undergraduate and graduate
training and worker safety training. All requests for funding
such mines and oil and gas drilling rigs must demonstrate
that they have been owned by the school, university, or
institution for 5 years prior to the date of enactment of the
Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006 and have been
actively used for instructional or training purposes during
that time.
``(4) Any funding made available under this section for
research, investigation, demonstration, experiment, or
training shall not be used for university overhead charges in
excess of 10 percent of the amount authorized by the
Secretary.
``SEC. 4. FORMER AND NEW PETROLEUM AND MINING ENGINEERING
PROGRAMS.
``(a) A school, university, or educational institution that
formerly met the requirements of section 3(b) immediately
before the date of the enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy
Resources Act of 2006, or that seeks to establish a new
program described in section 3(b), shall be eligible for
funding under this Act only if it--
``(1) establishes a petroleum, mining, or mineral
engineering program that meets the specific program criteria
and is accredited as such by ABET, Inc.;
``(2) agrees to the conditions of subsections (c) through
(h) of section 3 and the Secretary determines that the
program will strengthen and increase the number of nationally
available, well-qualified faculty members in petroleum,
mining, and mineral engineering; and
``(3) agrees to maintain the accredited program for 10
years after the date of the first receipt of funds under this
Act.
``(b) The Secretary shall seek the advice of the Committee
established pursuant to section 11 in determining the
criteria used to carry out this section.
``SEC. 5. FUNDING OF CONSORTIA OF HISTORIC AND EXISTING
SCHOOLS.
``Where appropriate, the Secretary may make funds available
to consortia of schools, universities, or institutions
described in sections 3, 4, and 6, including those consortia
that include schools, universities, or institutions that are
ineligible for funds under this Act if those schools,
universities, or institutions, respectively, have skills,
programs, or facilities specifically identified as needed by
the consortia to meet the necessary expenses for purposes
of--
``(1) specific energy and mineral research projects of
broad application that could not otherwise be undertaken,
including the expenses of planning and coordinating regional
petroleum, geothermal, mining, and mineral engineering or
beneficiation projects by two or more schools; and
``(2) research into any aspects of petroleum, geothermal,
mining, or mineral engineering or beneficiation problems,
including but not limited to exploration, that are related to
the mission of the Department of the Interior.
``SEC. 6. SUPPORT FOR SCHOOLS WITH ENERGY AND MINERAL
RESOURCE PROGRAMS IN PETROLEUM AND MINERAL
EXPLORATION GEOLOGY, PETROLEUM GEOPHYSICS, OR
MINING GEOPHYSICS.
``(a) Twelve percent of the annual outlay of funds
authorized by section 23(d) of the Deep Ocean Energy
Resources Act of 2006 may be granted to schools,
universities, and institutions other than those described in
sections 3 and 4.
``(b) The Secretary shall determine the eligibility of a
college or university to receive funding under this Act using
criteria that include--
``(1) the presence of a substantial program of
undergraduate and graduate geoscience instruction and
research in one or more of the following specialties:
petroleum geology, geothermal geology, mineral exploration
geology, economic geology, industrial minerals geology,
mining geology, petroleum geophysics, mining geophysics,
geological engineering, or geophysical engineering that has a
demonstrated history of achievement;
``(2) evidence of institutional commitment for the purposes
of this Act that includes a significant opportunity for
participation by undergraduate students in research;
``(3) evidence that such school, university, or institution
has or can obtain significant industrial cooperation in
activities within the scope of this Act;
[[Page H4863]]
``(4) agreement by the school, university, or institution
to maintain the programs for which the funding is sought for
the 10-year period beginning on the date the school,
university, or institution first receives such funds; and
``(5) requiring that such funding shall be for the purposes
set forth in subsections (c) through (h) of section 3 and
subject to the conditions set forth in section 3(h).
``(c) The Secretary shall seek the advice of the Committee
established pursuant to section 11 in determining the
criteria used to carry out this section.
``SEC. 7. DESIGNATION OF FUNDS FOR SCHOLARSHIPS AND
FELLOWSHIPS.
``(a) The Secretary shall utilize 10 percent of the annual
outlay of funds authorized by section 23(d) of the Deep Ocean
Energy Resources Act of 2006 for the purpose of providing
merit-based scholarships for undergraduate education,
graduate fellowships, and postdoctoral fellowships.
``(b) In order to receive a scholarship or a graduate
fellowship, an individual student must be a lawful permanent
resident of the United States or a United States citizen and
must agree in writing to complete a course of studies and
receive a degree in petroleum, mining, or mineral
engineering, petroleum geology, geothermal geology, mining
and economic geology, petroleum and mining geophysics, or
mineral economics.
``(c) The regulations required by section 9 shall require
that an individual, in order to retain a scholarship or
graduate fellowship, must continue in one of the course of
studies listed in subsection (b) of this section, must remain
in good academic standing, as determined by the school,
institution, or university and must allow for reinstatement
of the scholarship or graduate fellowship by the Secretary,
upon the recommendation of the school or institution. Such
regulations may also provide for recovery of funds from an
individual who fails to complete any of the courses of study
listed in subsection (b) of this section after notice that
such completion is a requirement of receipt funding under
this Act.
``(d) To carry out this section, the Secretary shall award
grants to schools, universities, and institutions that are
eligible to receive funding under section 3, 4 or 6. A
school, university, or institution receiving funding under
this subsection shall be responsible for enforcing the
requirements of this section for scholarship or fellowship
students and shall return to the Secretary any funds
recovered from an individual under subsection (c). An
institution seeking funds under this subsection shall
describe, in its application to the Secretary for funding,
the number of students that would be awarded scholarships or
fellowships if the application is approved, how such students
would be selected, and how the provisions of this section
will be enforced.
``SEC. 8. FUNDING CRITERIA FOR INSTITUTIONS.
``(a) Each application to the Secretary for funds under
this Act shall state, among other things, the nature of the
project to be undertaken; the period during which it will be
pursued; the qualifications of the personnel who will direct
and conduct it; the estimated costs; the importance of the
project to the Nation, region, or States concerned; its
relation to other known research projects theretofore pursued
or being pursued; the extent to which the proposed project
will maximize the opportunity for the training of
undergraduate petroleum, mining, and mineral engineers;
geologists and geophysicists; and the extent of participation
by nongovernmental sources in the project.
``(b) No funds shall be made available under this Act
except for an application approved by the Secretary. All
funds shall be made available upon the basis of merit of the
application, the need for the knowledge that it is expected
to produce when completed, and the opportunity it provides
for the undergraduate training of individuals as petroleum,
mining, and mineral engineers, geologists, and geophysicists.
The Secretary may use competitive review by nongovernmental
experts in relevant fields to determine which applications to
approve, to the extent practicable.
``(c) Funds available under this Act shall be paid at such
times and in such amounts during each fiscal year as
determined by the Secretary, and upon vouchers approved by
the Secretary. Each school, university, or institution that
receives funds under this Act shall--
``(1) establish its plan to provide for the training of
individuals as petroleum, mining, and mineral engineers,
geologists, and geophysicists under a curriculum appropriate
to the field of mineral resources and mineral engineering and
related fields;
``(2) establish policies and procedures that assure that
Federal funds made available under this Act for any fiscal
year will supplement and, to the extent practicable, increase
the level of funds that would, in the absence of such Federal
funds, be made available for purposes of this Act, and in no
case supplant such funds; and
``(3) have an officer appointed by its governing authority
who shall receive and account for all funds paid under this
Act and shall make an annual report to the Secretary on or
before the first day of September of each year, on work
accomplished and the status of projects underway, together
with a detailed statement of the amounts received under this
Act during the preceding fiscal year, and of its
disbursements on schedules prescribed by the Secretary.
``(d) If any of the funds received by the authorized
receiving officer of a program under this Act are found by
the Secretary to have been improperly diminished, lost, or
misapplied, such funds shall be recovered by the Secretary.
``(e) Schools, universities, and institutions receiving
funds under this Act are authorized and encouraged to plan
and conduct programs under this Act in cooperation with each
other and with such other agencies, business enterprises and
individuals.
``SEC. 9. DUTIES OF SECRETARY.
``(a) The Secretary, acting through the Assistant Secretary
for Land and Minerals Management, shall administer this Act
and shall prescribe such rules and regulations as may be
necessary to carry out its provisions not later than 1 year
after the enactment of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of
2006.
``(b)(1) There is established in the Department of the
Interior, under the supervision of the Assistant Secretary
for Land and Minerals Management, an office to be known as
the Office of Petroleum and Mining Schools (hereafter in this
Act referred to as the `Office') to administer the provisions
of this Act. There shall be a Director of the Office who
shall be a member of the Senior Executive Service. The
position of the Director shall be allocated from among the
existing Senior Executive Service positions at the Department
of the Interior and shall be a career reserved position as
defined in section 3132(a)(8) of title 5, United States Code.
``(2) The Director is authorized to appoint a Deputy
Director and to employ such officers and employees as may be
necessary to enable the Office to carry out its functions.
Such appointments shall be made from existing positions at
the Department of the Interior, and shall be subject to the
provisions of title 5, United States Code, governing
appointments in the competitive service. Such positions shall
be paid in accordance with the provisions of chapter 51 and
subchapter III of chapter 53 of such title relating to
classification and General Schedule pay rates.
``(3) In carrying out his or her functions, the Director
shall assist and advise the Secretary and the Committee
pursuant to section 11 of this Act by--
``(A) providing professional and administrative staff
support for the Committee including recordkeeping and
maintaining minutes of all Committee and subcommittee
meetings;
``(B) coordinating the activities of the Committee with
Federal agencies and departments, and the schools,
universities, and institutions to which funds are provided
under this Act;
``(C) maintaining accurate records of funds disbursed for
all scholarship and fellowship grants, research grants, and
grants for career technical education purposes;
``(D) preparing any regulations required to implement this
Act;
``(E) conducting site visits at schools, universities, and
institutions receiving funding under this Act; and
``(F) serving as a central repository for reports and
clearing house for public information on research funded by
this Act.
``(4) The Director or an employee of the Office shall be
present at each meeting of the Committee pursuant to section
11 or a subcommittee of such Committee.
``(5) The Director is authorized to contract with public or
private agencies, institutions, and organizations and with
individuals without regard to section 3324(a) and (b) of
title 31, United States Code, and section 5 of title 41,
United States Code, in carrying out his or her functions.
``(6) As needed the Director shall ascertain whether the
requirements of this Act have been met by schools,
universities, institutions, and individuals.
``(c) The Secretary, acting through the Office of Petroleum
and Mining Schools, shall furnish such advice and assistance
as will best promote the purposes of this Act, shall
participate in coordinating research, investigations,
demonstrations, and experiments initiated under this Act,
shall indicate to schools, universities, and institutions
receiving funds under this Act such lines of inquiry that
seem most important, and shall encourage and assist in the
establishment and maintenance of cooperation between such
schools, universities, and institutions, other research
organizations, the Department of the Interior, and other
Federal agencies.
``(d) The Secretary shall establish procedures--
``(1) to ensure that each employee and contractor of the
Office established by this section and each member of the
Committee pursuant to section 11 of this Act shall disclose
to the Secretary any financial interests in or financial
relationships with schools, universities, institutions or
individuals receiving funds, scholarships or fellowships
under this Act;
``(2) to require any employee, contractor, or member of the
Committee with a financial relationship disclosed under
paragraph (1) to recuse themselves from--
``(A) any recommendation or decision regarding the awarding
of funds, scholarships or fellowships; or
``(B) any review, report, analysis or investigation
regarding compliance with the provisions of this Act by a
school, university, institution or any individual.
``(e) On or before the first day of July of each year
beginning after the date of enactment of this sentence,
schools, universities,
[[Page H4864]]
and institutions receiving funds under this Act shall certify
compliance with this Act and upon request of the Director of
the office established by this section provide documentation
of such compliance.
``(f) An individual granted a scholarship or fellowship
with funds provided under this Act shall through their
respective school, university, or institution, advise the
Director of the office established by this Act of progress
towards completion of the course of studies and upon the
awarding of the degree within 30 days after the award.
``(g) The regulations required by this section shall
include a preference for veterans and service members who
have received or will receive either the Afghanistan Campaign
Medal or the Iraq Campaign Medal as authorized by Public Law
108-234, and Executive Order 13363.
``SEC. 10. COORDINATION.
``(a) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to impair or
modify the legal relationship existing between any of the
schools, universities, and institutions under whose direction
a program is established with funds provided under this Act
and the government of the State in which it is located.
Nothing in this Act shall in any way be construed to
authorize Federal control or direction of education at any
school, university, or institution.
``(b) The programs authorized by this Act are intended to
enhance the Nation's petroleum, mining, and mineral
engineering education programs and to enhance educational
programs in petroleum and mining exploration and to increase
the number of individuals enrolled in and completing these
programs. To achieve this intent, the Secretary and the
Committee pursuant to section 11 shall receive the continuing
advice and cooperation of all agencies of the Federal
Government concerned with the identification, exploration,
and development of energy and mineral resources.
``(c) Nothing in this Act is intended to give or shall be
construed as giving the Secretary any authority over mining
and mineral resources research conducted by any agency of the
Federal Government, or as repealing or diminishing existing
authorities or responsibilities of any agency of the Federal
Government to plan and conduct, contract for, or assist in
research in its area of responsibility and concern with
regard to mining and mineral resources.
``(d) The schools, universities, and institutions receiving
funding under this Act shall make detailed reports to the
Office of Petroleum and Mining Schools on projects completed,
in progress, or planned with funds provided under this Act.
All such reports shall be available to the public on not less
than an annual basis through the Office of Petroleum and
Mining Schools. All uses, products, processes, and other
developments resulting from any research, demonstration, or
experiment funded in whole or in part under this Act shall be
made available promptly to the general public, subject to
exception or limitation, if any, as the Secretary may find
necessary in the interest of national security, and subject
to the applicable Federal law governing patents.
``SEC. 11. COMMITTEE ON PETROLEUM, MINING, AND MINERAL
ENGINEERING AND ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCE
EDUCATION.
``(a) The Secretary shall appoint a Committee on Petroleum,
Mining, and Mineral Engineering and Energy and Mineral
Resource Education composed of--
``(1) the Assistant Secretary of the Interior responsible
for land and minerals management and not more than 16 other
persons who are knowledgeable in the fields of mining and
mineral resources research, including 2 university
administrators one of whom shall be from historic and
existing petroleum and mining schools; a community,
technical, or tribal college administrator; a career
technical education educator; 6 representatives equally
distributed from the petroleum, mining, and aggregate
industries; a working miner; a working oilfield worker; a
representative of the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact
Commission; a representative from the Interstate Mining
Compact Commission; a representative from the Western
Governors Association; a representative of the State
geologists, and a representative of a State mining and
reclamation agency. In making these 16 appointments, the
Secretary shall consult with interested groups.
``(2) The Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals
Management, in the capacity of the Chairman of the Committee,
may have present during meetings of the Committee
representatives of Federal agencies with responsibility for
energy and minerals resources management, energy and mineral
resource investigations, energy and mineral commodity
information, international trade in energy and mineral
commodities, mining safety regulation and mine safety
research, and research into the development, production, and
utilization of energy and mineral commodities. These
representatives shall serve as technical advisors to the
committee and shall have no voting responsibilities.
``(b) The Committee shall consult with, and make
recommendations to, the Secretary on policy matters relating
to carrying out this Act. The Secretary shall consult with
and carefully consider recommendations of the Committee in
such matters.
``(c) Committee members, other than officers or employees
of Federal, State, or local governments, shall be, for each
day (including traveltime) during which they are performing
Committee business, paid at a rate fixed by the Secretary but
not in excess of the daily equivalent of the maximum rate of
pay for level IV of the Executive Schedule under section 5136
of title 5, United States Code, and shall be fully reimbursed
for travel, subsistence, and related expenses.
``(d) The Committee shall be chaired by the Assistant
Secretary of the Interior responsible for land and minerals
management. There shall also be elected a Vice Chairman by
the Committee from among the members referred to in this
section. The Vice Chairman shall perform such duties as are
determined to be appropriate by the committee, except that
the Chairman of the Committee must personally preside at all
meetings of the full Committee. The Committee may organize
itself into such subcommittees as the Committee may deem
appropriate.
``(e) Following completion of the report required by
section 385 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, the Committee
shall consider the recommendations of the report, ongoing
efforts in the schools, universities, and institutions
receiving funding under this Act, the Federal and State
Governments, and the private sector, and shall formulate and
recommend to the Secretary a national plan for a program
utilizing the fiscal resources provided under this Act. The
Committee shall submit such plan to the Secretary for
approval. Upon approval, the plan shall guide the Secretary
and the Committee in their actions under this Act.
``(f) Section 10 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5
U.S.C. App. 2) shall not apply to the Committee.
``SEC. 12. CAREER TECHNICAL EDUCATION.
``(a) Up to 25 percent of the annual outlay of funds
authorized by section 23(d) of the Deep Ocean Energy
Resources Act of 2006 may be granted to schools or
institutions including, but not limited to, colleges,
universities, community colleges, tribal colleges and
universities, technical institutes, secondary schools, other
than those described in sections 3, 4, 5, and 6, and jointly
sponsored apprenticeship and training programs that are
authorized by Federal law.
``(b) The Secretary shall determine the eligibility of a
school or institution to receive funding under this section
using criteria that include--
``(1) the presence of a State-approved program in mining
engineering technology, petroleum engineering technology,
industrial engineering technology, or industrial technology
that--
``(A) is focused on technology and its use in energy and
mineral production and related maintenance, operational
safety, or energy infrastructure protection and security;
``(B) prepares students for advanced or supervisory roles
in the mining industry or the petroleum industry; and
``(C) grants either an associate's degree or a
baccalaureate degree in one of the subjects listed in
subparagraph (A);
``(2) the presence of a program, including a secondary
school vocational education program or career academy, that
provides training for individuals entering the petroleum,
coal mining, or mineral mining industries; or
``(3) the presence of a State-approved program of career
technical education at a secondary school, offered
cooperatively with a community college in one of the
industrial sectors of--
``(A) agriculture, forestry, or fisheries;
``(B) utilities;
``(C) construction;
``(D) manufacturing; and
``(E) transportation and warehousing.
``(c) Schools or institutions receiving funds under this
section must show evidence of an institutional commitment for
the purposes of career technical education and provide
evidence that the school or institution has received or will
receive industry cooperation in the form of equipment,
employee time, or donations of funds to support the
activities that are within the scope of this section.
``(d) Schools or institutions receiving funds under this
section must agree to maintain the programs for which the
funding is sought for a period of 10 years beginning on the
date the school or institution receives such funds, unless
the Secretary finds that a shorter period of time is
appropriate for the local labor market or is required by
State authorities.
``(e) Schools or institutions receiving funds under this
section may combine these funds with State funds, and other
Federal funds where allowed by law, to carry out programs
described in this section, however the use of the funds
received under this section must be reported to the Secretary
not less than annually.
``(f) The Secretary shall seek the advice of the Committee
established pursuant to section 11 in determining the
criteria used to carry out this section.
``SEC. 13. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR WORKFORCE ENHANCEMENT.
``(a) Physical Science, Engineering and Technology
Scholarship Program.--
``(1) From the amount of funds available to carry out this
section, the Secretary shall use 30 percent of that amount to
provide financial assistance for education in physical
sciences, engineering, and engineering or industrial
technology and disciplines that, as determined by the
Secretary, are critical to the functions of the Department of
the Interior and are needed in the Department of the Interior
workforce.
``(2) The Secretary of the Interior may award a scholarship
in accordance with this section to a person who--
``(A) is a citizen of the United States;
``(B) is pursuing an undergraduate or advanced degree in a
critical skill or discipline
[[Page H4865]]
described in paragraph (1) at an institution of higher
education; and
``(C) enters into a service agreement with the Secretary of
the Interior as described in subsection (e).
``(3) The amount of the financial assistance provided under
a scholarship awarded to a person under this subsection shall
be the amount determined by the Secretary of the Interior as
being necessary to pay all educational expenses incurred by
that person, including tuition, fees, cost of books,
laboratory expenses, and expenses of room and board. The
expenses paid, however, shall be limited to those educational
expenses normally incurred by students at the institution of
higher education involved.
``(b) Scholarship Program for Students Attending Minority
Serving Higher Education Institutions.--
``(1) From the amount of funds available to carry out this
section, the Secretary shall use 35 percent of that amount to
award scholarships in accordance with this section to persons
who--
``(A) are enrolled in a Minority Serving Higher Education
Institutions.
``(B) are citizens or nationals of the United States;
``(C) are pursuing an undergraduate or advanced degree in
agriculture, engineering, engineering or industrial
technology, or physical sciences, or other discipline that is
found by the Secretary to be critical to the functions of the
Department of the Interior and are needed in the Department
of the Interior workforce; and
``(D) enter into a service agreement with the Secretary of
the Interior as described in subsection (e).
``(2) The amount of the financial assistance provided under
a scholarship awarded to a person under this subsection shall
be the amount determined by the Secretary of the Interior as
being necessary to pay all educational expenses incurred by
that person, including tuition, fees, cost of books,
laboratory expenses, and expenses of room and board. The
expenses paid, however, shall be limited to those educational
expenses normally incurred by students at the institution of
higher education involved.
``(c) Education Partnerships With Minority Serving Higher
Education Institutions.--
``(1) The Secretary shall require the director of each
Bureau and Office, to foster the participation of Minority
Serving Higher Education Institutions in any regulatory
activity, land management activity, science activity,
engineering or industrial technology activity, or engineering
activity carried out by the Department of the Interior.
``(2) From the amount of funds available to carry out this
section, the Secretary shall use 35 percent of that amount to
support activities at Minority Serving Higher Education
Institutions by--
``(A) funding faculty and students in these institutions in
collaborative research projects that are directly related to
the Departmental or Bureau missions;
``(B) allowing equipment transfer to Minority Serving
Higher Education Institutions as a part of a collaborative
research program directly related to a Departmental or Bureau
mission;
``(C) allowing faculty and students at these Minority
Serving Higher Education Institutions to participate
Departmental and Bureau training activities;
``(D) funding paid internships in Departmental and Bureau
facilities for students at Minority Serving Higher Education
Institutions;
``(E) assigning Departmental and Bureau personnel to
positions located at Minority Serving Higher Educational
Institutions to serve as mentors to students interested in a
science, technology or engineering disciplines related to the
mission of the Department or the Bureaus.
``(d) Service Agreement for Recipients of Assistance.--
``(1) To receive financial assistance under subsection (a)
or (b) of this section--
``(A) in the case of an employee of the Department of the
Interior, the employee shall enter into a written agreement
to continue in the employment of the department for the
period of obligated service determined under paragraph (2);
and
``(B) in the case of a person not an employee of the
Department of the Interior, the person shall enter into a
written agreement to accept and continue employment in the
Department of the Interior for the period of obligated
service determined under paragraph (2).
``(2) For the purposes of this section, the period of
obligated service for a recipient of a scholarship under this
section shall be the period determined by the Secretary of
the Interior as being appropriate to obtain adequate service
in exchange for the financial assistance provided under the
scholarship. In no event may the period of service required
of a recipient be less than the total period of pursuit of a
degree that is covered by the scholarship. The period of
obligated service is in addition to any other period for
which the recipient is obligated to serve in the civil
service of the United States.
``(3) An agreement entered into under this subsection by a
person pursuing an academic degree shall include any terms
and conditions that the Secretary of the Interior determines
necessary to protect the interests of the United States or
otherwise appropriate for carrying out this section.
``(e) Refund for Period of Unserved Obligated Service.--
``(1) A person who voluntarily terminates service before
the end of the period of obligated service required under an
agreement entered into under subsection (d) shall refund to
the United States an amount determined by the Secretary of
the Interior as being appropriate to obtain adequate service
in exchange for financial assistance.
``(2) An obligation to reimburse the United States imposed
under paragraph (1) is for all purposes a debt owed to the
United States.
``(3) The Secretary of the Interior may waive, in whole or
in part, a refund required under paragraph (1) if the
Secretary determines that recovery would be against equity
and good conscience or would be contrary to the best
interests of the United States.
``(4) A discharge in bankruptcy under title 11, United
States Code, that is entered less than five years after the
termination of an agreement under this section does not
discharge the person signing such agreement from a debt
arising under such agreement or under this subsection.
``(f) Relationship to Other Programs.--The Secretary of the
Interior shall coordinate the provision of financial
assistance under the authority of this section with the
provision of financial assistance under the authorities
provided in this Act in order to maximize the benefits
derived by the Department of Interior from the exercise of
all such authorities.
``(g) Report.--Not later than September 1 of each year, the
Secretary of the Interior shall submit to the Congress a
report on the status of the assistance program carried out
under this section. The report shall describe the programs
within the Department designed to recruit and retain a
workforce on a short-term basis and on a long-term basis.
``(h) Definitions.--As used in this section:
``(1) The term `Minority Serving Higher Education
Institutions' means a Hispanic-serving institution,
historically Black college or university, Alaska Native-
serving institution, tribal college or university, or insular
area school.
``(2) The term `Hispanic-serving institution' has the
meaning given the term in section 502(a) of the Higher
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1101a(a)).
``(3) The term `historically Black college or university'
has the meaning given the term `part B institution' in
section 322 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
1061).
``(4) The term `tribal college or university' has the
meaning given the term `Tribal College or University' in
section 316(b)(3) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 1059c).
``(5) The term `institution of higher education' has the
meaning given such term in section 101 of the Higher
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001).
``(6) The term `Alaska Native-serving institution' has the
meaning given the term in section 317 of the Higher Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1059d).
``(7) The term `insular area school' means an academic
institution or university in American Samoa, Guam, The
Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin
Islands, or any other territory or possession of the United
States.
``(i) Funding.--To implement this section, the Secretary
shall use 3 percent of the annual outlay authorized by
section 23(d) of the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of
2006.''.
(b) Funding for Energy Research.--
(1) Using 20 percent of the funds authorized by subsection
(d), the Secretary of Energy, through the energy supply
research and development programs of the Department of
Energy, and in consultation with the Office of Science of the
Department of Energy, shall carry out a program to award
grants to institutions of higher education on the basis of
competitive, merit-based review, for the purpose of
conducting research on advanced energy technologies with the
potential to transform the energy systems of the United
States so as to--
(A) reduce dependence on foreign energy supplies;
(B) reduce or eliminate emissions of greenhouse gases;
(C) reduce negative environmental effects associated with
energy production, storage, and use; and
(D) enhance the competitiveness of United States energy
technology exports.
(2) Awards made under this subsection may include funding
for--
(A) energy efficiency;
(B) renewable energy, including solar, wind, and biofuels;
and
(C) nuclear, hydrogen, and any other energy research that
could accomplish the purpose set forth in paragraph (1).
(3) The Secretary of Energy may require or authorize
grantees under this subsection to partner with industry, but
only to the extent that such a requirement does not prevent
long-range, potentially pathbreaking research from being
funded under this subsection.
(4) An institution of higher education seeking funding
under this subsection shall submit an application at such
time, in such manner, and containing such information as the
Secretary of Energy may require.
(5) In this subsection, the term ``institution of higher
education'' has the meaning given that term in section 101(a)
of the Higher Education Act of 1965.
(c) Funding for Energy Scholarships.--
(1) Using 5 percent of the funds authorized by subsection
(d), the Secretary of Energy, through the energy supply
research and development programs of the Department of
Energy, and in consultation with the Office
[[Page H4866]]
of Science of the Department of Energy, shall carry out a
program to award grants to institutions of higher education
on the basis of competitive, merit-based review, to grant
graduate traineeships to Ph.D. students who are citizens of
the United States who will carry out research on advanced
energy technologies to accomplish the purpose set forth in
subsection (c)(1).
(2) Awards made under this subsection may include funding
for--
(A) energy efficiency;
(B) renewable energy, including solar, wind, and biofuels;
and
(C) nuclear, hydrogen, and any other energy research that
would accomplish the purpose set forth in subsection (c)(1)
that is not eligible for funding under section 7 of the
Energy and Mineral Schools Reinvestment Act.
(3) An institution of higher education seeking funding
under this subsection shall submit an application at such
time, in such manner, and containing such information as the
Secretary of Energy may require.
(4) In this subsection, the term ``institution of higher
education'' has the meaning given that term in section 101(a)
of the Higher Education Act of 1965.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $150,000,000 for
each of fiscal years 2007 through 2017.
Page 95, line 3, before the semicolon insert the following:
``, with particular consideration awarded to establishing
programs at minority serving institutions''.
Page 96, line 18, before the period insert the following:
``, with particular consideration awarded to minority serving
institutions''.
Page 123, beginning at line 22, strike ``The purpose'' and
all that follows through ``funding for'' at line 23 and
insert ``The purpose of this section is to provide for''.
Page 124, line 6, strike the semicolon and insert a period.
Page 124, strike line 7 and all that follows through page
129, line 9, and insert the following:
(c) State Defined.--In this section the term ``State''
means the agency of a State designated by its Governor or
State law to perform the functions and activities described
in subsection (b).
Page 129, line 10, strike ``(e)'' and insert ``(c)''.
Page 131, strike lines 14 through 18 and insert the
following:
(4) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this subsection for each of
fiscal years 2007 through 2011 not less than $35,000,000.
Each pilot project
Page 131, line 21, strike ``(f)'' and insert ``(d)''.
Page 134, strike line 15 and all that follows through
``fiscal year.'' at line 18 and insert the following:
(5) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this subsection for each of
fiscal years 2007 through 2011 not less than $5,000,000. Each
pilot project
Page 135, line 12, strike ``(g)'' and insert ``(e)''.
Page 137, strike lines 9 through 11 and insert the
following:
(5) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this subsection--
(A) $65,000,000 for fiscal year 2007; and
(B) $37,500,000 for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2013.
Page 137, line 12, strike ``(h)'' and insert ``(f)''.
Page 137, strike line 21 and 22 and insert the following:
(3) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this subsection funds for
Page 138, line 4, strike ``517'' and insert ``507''.
Page 138, line 9, strike ``(b)(1)'' and insert ``(b)(13) or
(b)(14)''.
Page 147 , line 14, strike section 30 and insert the
following:
SEC. 30. AVAILABILITY OF OCS RECEIPTS TO PROVIDE PAYMENTS
UNDER SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITY SELF-
DETERMINATION ACT OF 2000.
Section 9 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1338) is amended by inserting after subsection (i), as
added by section 7 of this Act, the following new subsection:
``(j) Conditional Availability of Funds for Payments Under
Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of
2000.--
``(1) Availability of funds.--Subject to paragraph (2), but
notwithstanding any other provision of this section,
$50,000,000 of OCS Receipts shall be available to the
Secretary of the Treasury for each of fiscal years 2007
through 2012 to make payments under sections 102 and 103 of
the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act
of 2000 (Public Law 106-393; 16 U.S.C. 500 note). The
Secretary of the Treasury shall use the funds made available
by this subsection to make such payments in lieu of using
funds in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, as
otherwise authorized by sections 102(b)(3) and 103(b)(2) of
such Act.
``(2) Condition on availability.--OCS Receipts shall be
available under paragraph (1) for a fiscal year only if--
``(A) title I of the Secure Rural Schools and Community
Self-Determination Act of 2000 has been reauthorized through
at least that fiscal year; and
``(B) the authority to initiate projects under titles II
and III of such Act has been extended through at least that
fiscal year.''.
Add at the end the following:
SEC. 31. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS TO BUY AND BUILD AMERICAN.
(a) Buy and Build American.--It is the intention of the
Congress that this Act, among other things, result in a
healthy and growing American industrial, manufacturing,
transportation, and service sector employing the vast talents
of America's workforce to assist in the development of
affordable energy from the Outer Continental Shelf. Moreover,
the Congress intends to monitor the deployment of personnel
and material in the Outer Continental Shelf to encourage the
development of American technology and manufacturing to
enable United States workers to benefit from this Act by good
jobs and careers, as well as the establishment of important
industrial facilities to support expanded access to American
resources.
(b) Safeguard for Extraordinary Ability.--Section 30(a) of
the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1356(a)) is
amended in the matter preceding paragraph (1) by striking
``regulations which'' and inserting ``regulations that shall
be supplemental and complimentary with and under no
circumstances a substitution for the provisions of the
Constitution and laws of the United States extended to the
subsoil and seabed of the outer Continental Shelf pursuant to
section 4(a)(1) of this Act, except insofar as such laws
would otherwise apply to individuals who have extraordinary
ability in the sciences, arts, education, or business, which
has been demonstrated by sustained national or international
acclaim, and that''.
Modification to Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Pombo
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I have a modification at the desk.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will report the modification.
The Clerk read as follows:
Modification to amendment No. 1 offered by Mr. Pombo:
Page 1, line 1, strike ``1996'' and insert ``1995''.
Page 21, line 24, before the semicolon, insert the
following: ``, with particular consideration awarded to
establishing programs and minority serving institutions''.
Page 23, line 18, before the period, insert the following:
``, with particular consideration awarded to minority serving
institutions''.
Page 52, strike the instruction relating to page 95.
Page 53, strike the instruction relating to page 96.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment is modified.
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 897, the gentleman
from California (Mr. Pombo) and the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr.
Rahall) each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young).
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, with adoption of the manager's
amendment, this bill is going to give Floridians protection for their
coast that we haven't ever had before. And I think it is important to
note that some of our colleagues from Florida have misrepresented
exactly what this bill is going to do.
We have fought since 1983 to maintain a moratorium off Florida's Gulf
Coast against drilling of any kind. This manager's amendment, and this
bill, will guarantee that off of Florida's west coast, a district that
I represent, Mr. Bilirakis represents, others represent, there will be
a protection zone of 235, get this, 235 miles because in the manager's
amendment the so-called military mission line is put into statute. It
is made permanent and anything east of that line in the Gulf of Mexico
there will be no drilling. So Florida's west coast is protected far and
above where we had originally requested, 235 miles. That is a lot of
protection. And this manager's amendment makes this bill good for
Florida.
{time} 1615
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, has the chairman explained the amendment
yet?
Mr. POMBO. If the gentleman will yield, I am yielding time on my
time. You can yield time on yours.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, as I understand, if I am on the right
amendment, the pending amendment drops some provisions of the
underlying legislation such as new royalty relief, which should never
have been part of the bill to begin with.
On balance, however, the amendment consists of budget gimmickry
designed to hide the true costs to the Treasury of the bill and to
pacify CBO by pushing the spending beyond the 10-year
[[Page H4867]]
scoring window. Under the manager's amendment, State revenue sharing
will cost the Federal Treasury $18 billion in the first 10 years under
the CBO analysis.
According to the MMS, Minerals Management Service, which administers
the offshore OCS oil and gas leasing program, this legislation's
provisions for diverting Federal revenues to States will cost $74
billion over the first 15 years and a staggering $600 billion over six
decades. So under the manager's amendment, the new gimmickry, as I
understand it, the Federal spending is largely deferred until 10 years
and then the costs escalate rapidly and continue permanently. So that
is the basis for my opposition.
It is a new, permanent entitlement program with 80 percent of the
diverted Federal revenue goes only to four States, as we have heard in
previous debate, those States being Louisiana, Texas, Alabama, and
Mississippi. This is revenue that is generated from the development of
oil and gas resources owned by all the American people. All of our
names are on the deed. And it currently goes to the Federal Treasury
and is allocated by Congress for many, many national priorities that
are getting slashed these days.
And despite assertions to the contrary, this is not new revenue to be
generated by this bill, but rather it is existing revenue that is
generated under current laws allowing for the development of oil and
gas on Federal OCS lands, primarily in the Gulf of Mexico. The
publicly-owned OCS resources are far beyond the State boundaries, and
to grant the adjacent Gulf States a permanent entitlement to those
revenues is to the detriment and at the cost of all the other States.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time in opposition to the
manager's amendment.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
(Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise
and extend her remarks.)
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, this is about natural gas.
Natural gas not for Texas or Louisiana but natural gas for the entire
country, Midwest, Southwest, east coast, for the entire country.
Energy imports now make up one-third of America's trade deficit.
Through this bill America could improve the supply/demand imbalance,
lower consumer prices, and increase jobs by producing more of its own
energy resources.
I want to make sure that we do have an environmentally safe way of
finding energy. I also want to expand the opportunities for jobs. And
this manager's amendment creates petroleum and mining programs in
historically black colleges and Hispanic-serving colleges. In addition,
it provides consideration for programs dealing with energy and mineral
resource programs to train future geologists so that we can be
independent as well as look to alternative fuels. And then I would hope
that this legislation, as it moves towards conference, can reinforce
our commitment to giving competitive advantage to a certain extent to
small minority-owned and women-owned businesses so they have equal
access to oil and gas leases.
I hope we can work together as we move this legislation forward.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that two of my amendments to H.R. 4761,
the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006, have been incorporated
into the Manager's Amendment. In addition, I have another amendment
which I will be introducing on the floor.
First and foremost, I must admit that I do have reservations about
certain provisions in this bill and the process with which this bill
has arrived on the House floor. I think many of us would agree that the
issues central to this bill, the future of energy exploration off of
our Pacific, Atlantic, and Gulf coastlines, deserves more time for
deliberation and debate. Also, I would have preferred if this bill
would have included more careful consideration of the environmental
impact offshore drilling would have on our Continental Shelf
Activities. However, this bill is about helping the production of clean
natural gas cheaply for all of America.
Energy is the lifeblood of every economy, especially ours. Producing
more of it leads to more good jobs, cheaper goods, lower fuel prices,
and greater economic and national security. However, the U.S. is more
than 60 percent dependent on foreign sources of energy, twice as
dependent today as we were just 30 years ago. Although energy is the
lifeblood of America's economic security, this growing and dangerous
dependence has resulted in the loss of hundreds of thousands of good
American jobs, skyrocketing consumer prices, and vulnerabilities in our
national security.
Energy imports now make up one third of America's trade deficit.
Through this bill, America could improve the supply-demand imbalance,
lower consumer prices, and increase jobs by producing more of its own
energy resources. With my district of Houston being the energy capital
of the world, I support the efforts that this bill makes to recognize
state stakeholders and incorporate their interests in revenue sharing.
According to the U.S. Minerals Management Service (MMS), America's
deep seas on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) contain 420 trillion
cubic feet of natural gas (the U.S. consumes 23 TCF per year) and 86
billion barrels of oil (the U.S. imports 4.5 billion per year). Even
with all these energy resources, the U.S. sends more than $300 billion
(and countless American jobs) overseas every year for energy we can
create at home.
In some cases, the U.S. is facing much-higher energy prices than
other countries. Natural gas, for example, is as much at ten times more
expensive in the United States than it is in foreign nations. This fact
alone has led to the loss of hundreds of thousands of high-paying
American jobs, as natural gas-dependent factories are forced to close
their doors and move overseas in search of more affordable energy. The
outsourcing of American jobs is an issue of central importance to me
and my constituents, and I believe this bill is a step in the right
direction of bringing jobs back to hard-working Americans.
Yet the present issue I would like to speak on addresses the fact
that contracts and leases, as considered in this bill, engage fierce
competition from national and multinational corporations, in addition
to domestic businesses. The share of businesses owned by minorities
rose from 6.8 percent of all U.S. businesses in 1982 to 15.1 percent in
1997, yet this is far below representative of the proportion of the
minority population today.
Historically, minority and women-owned businesses have been
disadvantaged in seeking and winning these contracts. According to a
survey by the Small Business Administration, minority-owned employer
establishments had lower survival rates than non-minority-owned
employer establishments between 1997 and 2002.
During 1997-2001, the business expansion rates of three minority
business groups were higher than that for non-minority-owned
businesses. While 27.4 percent of non-minority owned establishments
expanded during this period, 34.0 percent of Hispanic-owned employer
establishments expanded, as did 32.1 percent of Asian and Pacific
Islander owned establishments, and 27.8 percent of American Indian/
Alaska Native-owned establishments.
There may be inherent disadvantages for these businesses, but it is
clear their potential is tremendous. This amendment ensures that these
businesses have the ability to compete fairly for these lucrative
opportunities.
I am very proud that my district, Harris County and Houston ranks
sixth and Texas ranked fifth in the country for the largest number of
African-American owned firms, following New York, California, Florida,
and Georgia. Minority and women-owned businesses across the country
will appreciate the effort to preserve their opportunity to compete for
these contracts.
I encourage the esteemed members of the committee to remember that
there are a great many barriers to minority and women business
professionals, and provisions such as these preserve equal access and
open opportunities.
In addition, we must continue to safeguard equal opportunities in
fields of study and professions that have far too low of a minority
ratio.
According to the National Center for Educational Statistics,
Americans who are African-American, Hispanic, and Native American make
up only 9.7 percent of the science and engineering workforce, compared
to 16.8 percent of the entire U.S. labor force.
The National Science Foundation contends that although the
proportions of women, Blacks, and Hispanics in science and engineering
occupations have continued to grow over time, there are still fewer
numbers in science than their proportions of the population. In
addition, the representation of African-Americans in science and
engineering occupations increased from 2.6 percent in 1980 to 6.9
percent in 2000. The representation of Hispanics increased from 2.0
percent to 3.2 percent. However, for Hispanics, this is proportionally
less than their increase in the population.
With these provisions, the door should be opened a few more inches.
We want America's youth to find their way to engineering and the
sciences.
I encourage the esteemed members of the committee to remember that
there are a great
[[Page H4868]]
many barriers to minorities and women pursuing degrees in the sciences
and in advancing their small businesses. Accordingly, my amendments
which have been incorporated into the Manager's Amendment and my
amendment regarding minority serving institutions which I will
introduce on the floor provide provisions which preserve fundamental
American values of equal access and opportunities.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and final passage.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Kind).
(Mr. KIND asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
I find myself in the uncomfortable position of supporting legislation
that my ranking member on the Resources Committee opposes, because I
have all the respect and admiration for his knowledge of energy issues
in this country.
And I am the first to admit, standing here today, that we do need a
new energy policy for a new century, one that transitions off our
dependence on the imports of foreign oil, on fossil fuel consumption
generally, with major investments in alternative and renewable energy
sources, biofuels, hybrid technology; the energy source of the future,
which is hydrogen power.
But I also admit that this is not going to happen overnight. And the
reality of the situation as it exists in the upper Midwest today is
that we have well over 500 coal-burning electrical power plants today,
58 in Wisconsin, with many more in line of production. And the main
reason they are moving to more coal burning in the upper Midwest is
because of the spike of natural gas prices in this country. No one can
convince me that that is good and healthy for our environment. No one
can convince me that that is the best route to take in our battle
against global warming in this country.
This, I believe, is commonsense legislation that brings the Gulf
States into the decision-making as far as production off their coasts.
I believe it will lead to a greater enhancement in production of
natural gas capability in this country. It will enable us to buy some
additional time in order to put together a long-ranging, forward-
looking energy policy that makes sense for our consumers, makes sense
for our economy, and perhaps more importantly, makes sense for our
battle against global warming that we face on this planet.
I encourage my colleagues to support the legislation.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume,
continuing to claim my time in opposition.
I understand that the administration has just come out with their
position on this legislation; and, as I understand it, much to
everybody's surprise, it is in opposition. It is in opposition on
budget grounds, as I understand the statement that has just come out
from the administration, as well as their opposition to the revenue-
sharing proposals that are contained inherent in this current
legislation.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Hawaii (Mr. Abercrombie).
(Mr. ABERCROMBIE asked and was given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, I have been saying both in debate and
on the floor and talking to people that we want to reach out to those
who say they are in opposition. But it is difficult to reach out when
you have to listen to the kinds of things that are being said here
about revenues and all the rest of it.
Let us get something straight here. One hundred percent of nothing is
nothing. There are no revenues coming in. All of these figures that are
being bandied about as if we are losing something, we are not losing
anything except energy independence in this country.
Now we have reached out to everybody that we wanted to speak to and
who has wanted to be honest with us about what we are talking about
here today.
We are losing jobs by the thousands. Why do you think that American
labor is on our side in this? We are losing our petrochemical
industries. We are losing our manufacturing base. We are losing our
ability to farm, while rich, elite people in this country that support
some of these environmental Taliban organizations are out there with
the propaganda that is trying to say that some of us that are trying to
get to energy independence are the ones that are causing the
difficulty.
Well, let me tell you something. We are not going to back off on
this, and we are not going to listen to lies about revenue and
distortions about revenue. We are going to bring revenue into this
country and bring energy independence into this country. We are not
backing down, and we are not backing off.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
So the Bush administration has now checked in, and the Bush
administration is saying they are very unhappy about $600 billion being
taken from the Federal Government and given to four States. They are
unhappy with this rip-off of the Federal taxpayers of 46 States. This
transfer of $600 billion, down here. Yes, drill down here. Yes, drill
tomorrow. Yes, at $70 a barrel, drill, drill, drill. That is 80
percent. But do not ship $600 billion from the red States, the 46
States, down to only four States.
That is what the Bush administration just said to you all. It will
force him to cut the budget in Iraq. It will force him to cut Medicare.
Even this administration does not want this additional $600 billion
loss.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from California has 30 seconds
remaining, and the gentleman from West Virginia has the right to close.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I say that, regardless of how I describe the amendment, it really
does not matter, because they make it up as they go along. And in terms
of the message from the President, it actually says: ``The
administration supports House passage of H.R. 4761 to advance the
legislative process.'' They did not come out and oppose it.
The underlying manager's amendment was an agreement that we worked
out with so many different people in order to take care of issues that
they had.
I urge support of the manager's amendment.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
That hardly sounds like a ringing endorsement of the legislation.
When the administration says they want to move the process forward, I
hardly think that means that they will sign the current bill as written
into law. And I have the administration's language here in front of me.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. RAHALL. Yes, I will yield. Did they say that it was signed into
law?
Mr. POMBO. Did they say that they opposed it?
Mr. RAHALL. Well, it is hardly a ringing endorsement. I have been
here 30 years, and I have seen administrations endorse legislation or I
have seen where they wanted to move along the process.
Reclaiming my time, the way I read it, although I don't have my
glasses, it is to move this process forward.
``The administration strongly opposes revenue sharing . . . '' I am
reading now. My eyes just focused.
``The administration strongly opposes revenue-sharing provisions that
do not incentivize production and that would reduce Federal receipts
relative to current law and have a long-term impact on the Federal
deficit. The administration's preliminary estimate is that the revenue-
sharing provisions of H.R. 4761 would reduce Federal receipts by
several hundred billion dollars over 60 years.''
Is that a ringing endorsement? Is that support of the legislation?
Read the English language.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Pombo), as modified.
The amendment, as modified, was agreed to.
Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Inslee
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2
printed in House Report 109-540.
[[Page H4869]]
Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 2 offered by Mr. Inslee:
In section 26(h)(3) (page 137, line 24), strike
``$6,000,000'' and insert ``$20,000,000''.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 897, the gentleman
from Washington (Mr. Inslee) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington.
Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
This is a very simple amendment that will increase the amount of
authorization for clean, renewable ocean energy projects from the
current $6 million to $20 million.
We have enormous potential off of our shores not only for oil and gas
but for clean, renewable sources, including wave power-generated
electricity and current-generated electricity, and there are several
places in the United States where we are doing that today. In fact, in
Hawaii, we have a wave power system that is generating electricity for
the United States Navy, a very ingenious product that is essentially an
ocean bell that bobs up and down just underneath the surface of the
ocean, drives a hydraulic system, and generates electricity.
Just to give you an order of magnitude of the capacity that we may
have to develop off our shores, a 10 megawatt power station would only
use 30 acres of ocean space. That is enough for 10,000 homes. A 10 by
10 area off our oceans has enough capacity, and this is pretty amazing
when you think about it, to generate all of the electricity used in the
State of California. Now, these are prototypes in the water today, but
we think they have great, great potential. So we would like a modest
increase to allow this technology to go forward.
It is a very modest increase, of course, and here is something we can
do with our oceans that is clean and renewable. And we have heard the
science coming out on global warming, the importance of not just
relying on fossil fuel in our energy plan.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Holt).
{time} 1630
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment to devote more
resources to extracting energy from the ocean. We should be doing
everything we can to develop all sustainable environmentally benign
sources. Ocean sources, whether you are talking about thermal
gradients, tidal power, wave power, have a lot, a lot of energy and in
many cases they can be extracted in an environmentally benign way.
My colleague from Washington spoke about a kind of technology, for
example, Ocean Power Technologies Company located in New Jersey has an
installation in Hawaii that extracts energy from the waves and converts
that to electricity. The buoys are located well offshore. They are
invisible to residents from the coast line. There are, of course, still
questions to be resolved, still technologies to be developed; but the
basic technology to harness the ocean's power already exists. What the
gentleman from Washington is proposing makes great sense.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from California claim the
time in opposition?
Mr. POMBO. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
While I do support clean renewable energy, obviously we all have
questions about this particular technology. We just heard an
impassioned plea on the part of Mr. Rahall about the costs; and to go
in and increase the cost does concern me, but I know this is something
that Mr. Inslee has researched. He cares a great deal about it, and I
tend to accept his explanation even though I do have some concerns.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Young).
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, in my enthusiasm for the
manager's amendment, I transposed a number. I said the military mission
line would protect 325 miles. It is actually 235 miles, which is still
a good deal for Florida; but I just wanted to correct that I did
transpose the number.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Cantor).
Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
I rise in opposition to the amendment and in support of the amended
Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act.
In America we continue to gamble our economic future through
dependence on foreign sources of energy. The time to stop this is now.
The most effective and sure way to secure our energy future is to
utilize the fossil fuel resources we have here at home. The underlying
bill will allow Virginia to choose exploration off its coast.
Virginia's deep ocean production will help reduce America's
dependence on foreign oil and provide a revenue source to fund the
cleanup of the Chesapeake Bay. Energy security depends first on a
reliable supply through exploration of domestic oil and gas reserves
while we encourage the development of alternative sources of energy.
This bill, Mr. Chairman, and I recognize the leadership and the
gentleman of California in bringing this bill forward, is a necessary
part of ensuring American energy security, and I am proud to support
it.
Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I appreciate the Chair's acceptance of the amendment. I just wanted
to point out I have looked at this, as the Chair believes. I just want
to point out in dealing with these new energy technologies, we are
going to find some that are dry holes and do not work, but I think it
is incumbent on us to look for any technology that has a reasonable
chance for success. I think this one does. This is a good investment
for taxpayers. I appreciate the Chair accepting the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume,
and I yield to the gentleman from Mississippi.
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, prior to Hurricane Katrina,
the hottest topic on the Mississippi gulf coast was a proposed ban on
drilling 12 miles out, and that has kind of been put on hold. But
anywhere from champions of industry who actually own shipyards that
repair drilling rigs are in favor of this; an ex-president of Tidewater
Marine was in favor of this ban. A lot of people in the oil business
wanted a ban for 12 miles off of Mississippi. My question is, how would
this affect that? There really is not a synopsis of the bill available
yet, and I regret that, and I am sure it is an oversight, but
representing the people of south Mississippi, I would like to know how
does this affect that.
Mr. POMBO. Reclaiming my time, it does not impact it at all, and your
State would be able to continue doing exactly what they are doing.
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. So if the State wished to have a ban for
12 miles from the shoreline or 12 miles out from the barrier islands,
that would be within their jurisdiction under this bill?
Mr. POMBO. Yes, sir. Reclaiming my time, it actually gives the State
the first 50 miles that they do not have to do anything, and they could
ban anything within that first 50 miles.
Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. POMBO. I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support the Inslee
amendment which we have accepted and I thank you, but I wanted to ask
these two questions: one, the issue of revenue sharing perspectively
does not limit itself just to States that names have been called. It
does expand to the potential of revenue sharing. And secondly, the
commitment that we would have to give advantage or give an opportunity
for small, medium, women-owned, and minority-owned businesses in the
granting of leases as we move toward conference and be able to develop
expanded opportunities for jobs.
Mr. POMBO. Reclaiming my time, I will tell the gentlewoman that we
have talked about her amendment and her
[[Page H4870]]
effort to expand the opportunities for smaller business, minority-owned
and women-owned businesses. I fully support that and will continue to
work with her to ensure that the revenue that is increased and the jobs
that are increased because of this bill, we will give as much as we
possibly can to small business and minority- and women-owned businesses
because I support that goal.
In terms of revenue sharing, contrary to some of the rhetoric you
have heard here today, every single State that has any kind of
development off its shores will share in the revenue. It is not just
limited to the four States. Although those four States would probably
like that, it is not just limited to the four States. It is open to
every single coastal State.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Tom Davis of Virginia
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3
printed in House Report 109-540.
Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 3 offered by Mr. Tom Davis of Virginia:
Add at the end the following new section:
SEC. __. AVAILABILITY OF OCS RECEIPTS TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR
TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE NATION'S
CAPITAL.
Section 9 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43.
U.S.C. 1338) is further amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
``(k) Availability of Funds for Improvements to the
Transportation Infrastructure of the Nation's Capital.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of this section,
$150,000,000 of OCS Receipts shall be available to the
Secretary of the Treasury for each of fiscal years 2007
through 2016 to make payments, subject to appropriations, to
the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (as
defined in the National Capital Transportation Act of 1969)
(sec. 9--1111.01 et seq., D.C. Official Code) to finance in
part the capital and preventive maintenance projects included
in the Capital Improvement Program approved by the Board of
Directors of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit
Authority.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 897, the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment.
Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as
I may consume.
(Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia asked and was given permission to revise
and extend his remarks.)
Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I commend Chairman Pombo for
bringing H.R. 4761, the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act of 2006, to the
floor today. This important legislation would modernize a key aspect of
our Nation's energy policy by providing for energy production on the
Outer Continental Shelf of the United States.
H.R. 4761 would generate a significant amount of new revenue in the
form of oil and natural gas royalties for coastal States that allow
offshore drilling, as well as the Federal Government. The amendment I
am offering today would authorize a portion of the funds generated by
the legislation to go to supporting Washington Metropolitan Area
Transit Authority. Specifically, the amendment would provide $150
million per year for 10 years to fund capital and preventative
maintenance projects for Metro, without which Metro could not function
effectively, would have to be matched dollar for dollar from Virginia,
Maryland and the District.
Congress has long recognized the unique relationship between Metro
and the Federal Government. Three times we have authorized renewed
Federal commitments to this system, understanding that it is a vital
Federal Government asset.
The government first committed to sharing in this responsibility for
Metro in 1960 when President Eisenhower signed the National Capital
Transportation Act, creating a National Capital Transportation Agency
to develop a regional rail system for the Nation's capital. Since that
time, Congress has periodically infused the system with Federal funding
to protect its original investment and accommodate ridership growth.
The government continues to pay its fair share of the costs of the
capital region's transit system.
Unlike other regional transit systems in the country, Metro was
designed to make sure Federal workers and contractors as well as
tourists have easy access to government offices and work places.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I certainly do not begrudge the gentleman from Virginia
or the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia for their efforts to
obtain additional funding for the transit system in this region. I have
ridden it. It is a very valuable part of our infrastructure not only in
our Nation's capital but in this country.
Quite honestly, I do not see any link here between OCS, oil and gas
leasing, and funding a particular transit system. I have got some
roadways in my State I wish I would have thought to include in this
bill as well. But nevertheless, the only specific authorized use of
these funds is for the Land and Water Conservation Fund, up to a total
of 900 million each and every year. That is important to my State.
There is a linkage here with conservation of our land and water
resources being financed with revenues obtained from the development of
these resources in this bill. So if there is a linkage but here between
OCS and WMATA, I see no linkage.
Second, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit, as all mature
transit systems are, is eligible for funding and it does receive
funding through the Mass Transit Account of the Highway Trust Fund.
There I am happy to support it as well through my position on the
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. And I know that the
authority is not really scratching for dollars these days, so that is
why I claimed this time in opposition.
Again, I salute Mr. Davis for his dedication as well as the
gentlewoman, Ms. Holmes Norton.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia.
Ms. NORTON. Chairman Davis has gone to wonderful creative trouble to
find the funds, funds that were not being obligated to use for other
purposes. This may look like a regional matter. It is a matter
involving 20 million visitors who come to the District of Columbia and,
frankly, have so piled on to the system that they have broken it down.
Moreover, the rest of the people who use it during the weekdays are
almost always Federal workers. We subsidize those Federal workers in
order to get them to use this system. Watch what you wish for. They are
now using it.
Now the system in which we have invested so much, we helped build it,
we the Federal Government, because we knew visitors and Federal workers
were chiefly involved. Because of that we have got to have a dedicated
stream of funding or we do not have enough cars and we are not able to
protect our investment by keeping the upkeep and that is why it is
falling down.
In every respect, Members have more at stake than we do because of
Federal workers and because our own constituents use this system. I
thank the gentleman.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman very much, and I
congratulate the gentleman from Virginia. He is amongst the most astute
Members of Congress, and it is clear that there is a big gravy train
moving through Congress this afternoon and he is one of the very
smartest Members to figure out that he should attach his constituents'
agenda to it. And rapid transit is a very important issue.
Unfortunately, the majority decided that Mr. Boehlert's amendment on
fuel economy standards for automobiles
[[Page H4871]]
was not important today. But I understand what the gentleman from
Virginia is doing, and I congratulate him on his acute understanding of
what this bill really is.
By the way, when I was a boy, my father was a milkman, and you looked
at television to see what you can aspire to be and my favorite show was
always ``Perry Mason,'' and I could never really figure out how Perry
was going to get his client out of the mess. And then with about 5
minutes left to go in the show, every single week Della Street, his
great assistant, would come into the back of the courtroom and say, I
have new evidence.
Now, the case would always get solved and Perry would always win. So
I have been charged all afternoon with making up numbers, that there
will not be, as I say there is, a $600 billion transfer from 46 States
down to 4 States. But now we have a Della Street-like letter from the
President of the United States to the Republican leadership of the
committee. Here is what the President says, ``The administration
strongly opposes the revenue-sharing provisions that do not incentivize
production and that would reduce Federal receipts relative to current
law and have a long-term impact on the Federal deficit. The
administration's preliminary estimate is that the revenue sharing
provisions would reduce Federal receipts by several hundred billion
dollars.''
{time} 1645
So it turns out that the numbers I was quoting from the Bush
administration, from its own Department of Interior, that this would
lead to a $600 billion loss of revenues from 46 States going down to
four States is now confirmed by President Bush's letter to us this
afternoon.
So if you want to vote this way, Members of Congress, you can do it.
And by the way, again I say this to Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi,
Alabama, delegations: if you win this vote this afternoon, put out a
press release. It is the greatest achievement of your career. It will
be the greatest achievement you ever, ever have here in the House
floor, moving $600 billion in one vote from 46 States to your States, a
great victory.
And President Bush today is asking the Members of Congress not to do
it. Now, Mr. Pombo will say to you, do not fix it now, we will fix it
later. But the President is saying this is a big mess. We oppose it.
Clean it up. And still we have a chance to clean it up.
Thank God we got the letter before we voted to create the mess. Now
Mr. Pombo is saying, let's create the mess and we will clean it up when
it gets to the Senate, which is, I think, an unnaturally great
deference to a body that ordinarily does not receive that kind of
respect from us.
Why should we wait for them to have the responsibility to deal with
what we all now understand to be a complete mess? Again, I congratulate
Mr. Davis, because if this is going to happen, I give you credit for
understanding that getting $150 million for his district makes a lot of
sense.
Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my
time to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I think Perry Mason would be very proud of
Mr. Davis on this effort. I understand, you and I have talked about it,
it is an important effort. I sympathize and am going to vote with Mr.
Markey, but I nevertheless think that your effort is certainly some
small attempt to reduce, by some little bit, the $600 billion. I thank
the gentleman for his efforts.
Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. I would appreciate your vote on the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Markey
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4
printed in House Report 109-540.
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 4 offered by Mr. Markey:
Strike section 2 (page 2, beginning at line 6) and all that
follows through the quoted subsection (r) in section 6(4)
(through page 11, line 25), and insert the following:
SEC. 2. ROYALTY SUSPENSION AUTHORITY AND IMPOSITION OF
CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES FEES.
Section 8 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1337) is amended by adding at the end the following
new subsections:
At the end of section 6(3) (page 10, line 13), strike the
period after the closed quotation marks and insert ``; and''.
In section 6(4), strike the quoted subsections (s) and (t)
(page 12, beginning at line 1).
At the end of section 6(4) (page 13, line 22) strike the
semicolon and insert a period.
Strike section 6(5) (page 13, beginning at line 23) and all
that follows through the end of the bill.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 897, the gentleman
from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) and a Member opposed each will control
5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, what my amendment will do is to correct the
problem that the President has identified, amongst other things that
also need correcting in the bill, while leaving intact a wonderful
provision that will ensure that we correct the problem that occurred in
the 1990s during the Clinton administration, which allows for oil
companies to escape paying the royalties which the American people
should be receiving on leases which were given out during that period
of time, 1998 and 1999.
I agree with the intent of the language which is in the bill that the
majority has crafted. They did a good job on that section, although
with the rest of the bill I have a problem. And my amendment will help
to correct that problem.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I do appreciate Mr. Markey's kind words
about at least one provision in the bill.
I do appreciate that he did not want to waste that sign, since he had
his staff make up the poster and they put a lot of hard work into that.
And even though it is inaccurate and really has very little to do with
the bill that we are discussing, I do appreciate his effort to recycle
and reuse his information, even though it is inaccurate.
For 30 years, opponents of American energy have cloaked their
arguments in an environmental apocalypse. They have tried to make the
argument that no matter what we do, it will destroy the environment. I
remember 30-plus years ago they started talking about wind energy
production.
And in my district we had one of the first windmill farms built
anywhere in this country. And it produces today a sizeable amount of
electricity: clean, nonpolluting electricity.
Those windmills are up for renewal, to have their permits renewed.
And lo and behold, the environmental groups are filing lawsuits against
renewing those permits. Because they produce energy. They do not like
energy production.
And what this amendment that Mr. Markey brings to us does is it takes
out all of the energy production. It does leave in the part about
trying to fix the mistake that was made during the Clinton
administration on royalties, but it takes out all of the energy
production.
It is a callous disregard for the jobs, the millions of jobs, that
have been lost over the last 30 years of following this kind of policy.
It is a callous disregard for the men and women of this country who
want a good job, who want the opportunity to feed their family on a
family-wage job. It takes it away. It tells them no.
You know, one of the things that I have heard over the years is that,
you know, union membership has gone down and tried to explain it away
in so many different ways. And I hear people talk about it, and I
think, you know, it is not about people not wanting to join the union;
it is about that we exported all of their jobs. The people who used to
work in the timber industry, their jobs are in Canada or Germany.
The people who used to work in the mining industry, their jobs are
now in South America. The people who work in oil and gas, their jobs
are in the Middle East or Canada. We have exported their jobs. And if
the Markey
[[Page H4872]]
amendment passes, we not only do not get those jobs back, we are going
to send the rest of them. Because we do not like people actually
working producing energy. That is what he is telling us.
This amendment went down in committee. It was offered, and it was
eloquently debated. But it went down big. And it went down big because
the people on the committee who have spent the greatest amount of time
working on this issue know how important it is to create jobs in this
country, to create clean natural gas in this country, so that it can be
the bridge to the future, so that things like Mr. Inslee's wave machine
may end up producing enough electricity so that we do not have to be
dependent on foreign oil any more.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\3/4\ minutes to the gentlewoman
from California (Mrs. Capps).
Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague for yielding me time.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Markey amendment that
would preserve the longstanding moratorium so important to coastal
States. The amendment would also preserve the underlying bill's one
redeeming feature, the renegotiating of the cash-cow leases now pouring
billions of dollars into already stuffed oil industry coffers.
Mr. Chairman, the bill before us represents what is wrong with the
Republican energy strategy. We have something like 3 percent of the
world oil reserves, and yet are responsible for 25 percent of the
world's demand. A report out yesterday noticed that with only 5 percent
of the world's population, the United States has 30 percent of the
world's automobiles, and we produce 45 percent of the world's
automotive carbon dioxide emissions.
This addiction harms our environment, our economy and our national
security. Even oil man George Bush says we are addicted to oil and we
must confront our problem. But the Republican strategy is just to drill
more. Not too much concerned about energy efficiency or conservation,
no real emphasis on alternative renewable energy. This is where we need
to go in the 21st century with the many new jobs it would entail in the
Midwest and all around the country.
Instead, what we have before us is a bill that attempts to bribe
coastal States into drilling off their shores by promising them more
money, a lot more money. Even the Bush administration says the bill
would drive up the Federal deficit by hundreds of billions of dollars
over the next few decades.
The argument that the bill gives States control over their coast is
specious at best. Control is mostly given to States that want to drill;
those that do not confront numerous hurdles for temporary protection
that can simply be overridden by Federal authorities.
Authority over Federal waters off our coast being moved to various
State capitals is a bad idea anyway. These are Federal waters. They
belong to all of us. The impacts from drilling, effects on fishing or
shipping are bigger than the interest of one State. Mr. Markey's
amendment would restore some sanity to this process. We should adopt
it.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield to Mr. Kirk for a unanimous consent
request.
(Mr. KIRK asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. KIRK. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I would
like to compliment the manager's amendment on reducing the fiscal
impact of this bill.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this legislation--a bill the
President has said ``would reduce Federal receipts by several hundred
billion dollars over the next 60 years.'' As the Statement of
Administration Policy put it, the administration strongly opposed key
provisions ``because of their long-term consequences on the Federal
deficit.''
This bill establishes new entitlement programs--mandatory spending
mechanisms that already drive up our deficit. It establishes costly oil
shale leases and imposes other expensive charges the Federal budget
cannot afford.
I am also worried that the bill sets up the oil and gas industry
above all other Federal interests. Under section 16, all Federal
permitting is prohibited, despite my other marine or naval concerns.
Many of these rigs could be put in sensitive waters with national
defense implications. Under this bill, the government can consider no
other issue--even for the defense of this Nation.
Section 17 allows lessees to request the Federal Government to
repurchase leases.
This is an irresponsible provision that allows a transfer of risk
from an energy company to the taxpayer. This is ironic because while
the Federal Government is in the red, most energy companies are
earnings record profits.
Mr. Chairman, we can have an honest debate about whether we should
open the Outer Continental Shelf to energy development but there should
be little debate on granting new assistance at the expense of the
taxpayer to energy companies who are some of the most profitable
entities on earth.
This bill, as it has been written, was a great threat to the
Treasury. I want to compliment the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member
for the manager's amendment they crafted that dramatically reduces the
cost of this bill. This amendment heeds many of the fiscal concerns of
the President and reduces that budgetary impact of the proposed
legislation. I would now urge the authors to further listen to the
President's fiscal guidance.
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the remaining minute.
What the Markey amendment will do is to remove the provision which
takes $600 billion from 46 States and gives it to four States, where
oil and gas companies can already drill. If my amendment is adopted,
according to CBO, my amendment will then generate $13 billion in new
revenues over the next 10 years.
So your choice on the Markey amendment is lose $600 billion or gain
$13 billion. Ladies and gentlemen, that is what this thing is all
about. It is all about the money. Because 80 percent of the oil and gas
that can be drilled for off our coast is already available. They might
have a lot of additional coastline in America, but the geological
service and the oil companies have said 80 percent of it is right here.
By the way, it is already legal to go there.
And we, Ed Markey, liberal from Massachusetts, we want you to go
there. I want you to drill there. Get the oil that is down there in the
gulf. But the revenues should go to the Federal Government or else, as
George Bush has just said to us in a letter this afternoon, we will
lose hundreds of billions of dollars to the Federal Government and give
it to only four States without any real understanding or debate here on
the House floor.
Vote for the Markey amendment. Let's generate $13 billion worth of
revenue for our country rather than lose $600 billion.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of the time.
Mr. Chairman, there is a great deal of misunderstanding about what
this bill is about. And there is one thing that Mr. Markey said that
was actually accurate, and that is that it is about the money. We just
saw recently in Canada, they announced they needed 100,000 new oil
field workers, 100,000. And they are taking them from us. They are
taking our jobs from us to produce our energy.
We also heard one of my colleagues from California, and I am just
amazed by this, right now the State of California controls 3 miles off
its coast. This bill gives our State 100 miles. We would control 100
miles off our coast. Not 3, 100.
If you really do oppose drilling off the coast of California or
Florida or wherever your State may be, you have to support the bill and
vote against the short-sighted, mean, callous Markey amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the
noes appeared to have it.
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Massachusetts will be postponed.
{time} 1700
Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Bilirakis
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5
printed in House Report 109-540.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
[[Page H4873]]
Amendment No. 5 offered by Mr. Bilirakis:
In section 9(2), in the quoted subsection (g)(1)(A), strike
``50 miles'' each place it appears (page 38, lines 9 and 19)
and insert ``125 miles'' .
In section 9(2), in the quoted subsection (g)(1), strike
subparagraph (B) (page 39, beginning at line 6).
Page 40, lines 17 and 18, strike ``100'' each place it
appears and insert ``125''.
In section 9(2), strike the quoted subsection (h) (page 46,
beginning at line 7).
In section 9(2), in the quoted subsection (i) (page 48,
beginning at line 7)--
(1) strike ``or (h), or both,'';
(2) strike ``(1)''; and
(3) strike ``, and (2)'' and all that follows through the
end of the sentence and insert a period.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 897, the gentleman
from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I am offering this amendment with several of my Florida colleagues:
Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, Bill Young, Ginny Brown-Waite, Katherine
Harris, Robert Wexler, Mario Diaz-Balart, and Cliff Stearns.
First of all, Mr. Chairman, I am told that this amendment is slated
for defeat, and that is really unfortunate because it greatly improves
the basic bill in that it provides solid, true statutory protections
off of Florida and all coastal State shores. This amendment does not
shred the existing 25-year drilling moratorium, as claimed by some
vocal groups. In fact, that moratorium ends in 2007 and 2012. The
moratorium is by executive order. It can be revoked at any time, even
before July 1, 2007, and before 2012.
This amendment codifies in statute the protection up to 125 miles.
The moratorium does not now cover the Florida Keys nor most of the
Florida Atlantic. The amendment gives protection to all of the Florida
coastlines and to other coastal States permanently, not subject to the
whims of any executive.
This form of government is a republic, meaning that we legislators
represent our constituents' interests, a government of, by and for the
people. We ask ourselves, who is better equipped to better decide how
close offshore drilling should come to a State's coast, the U.S.
Congress or the States themselves?
I say that the people of coastal States should make that decision. If
they want leasing and drilling, they can opt in. If they do not, then
no action is required.
The bottom line, Mr. Chairman, of my amendment is to allow States to
determine whether or not drilling occurs closest to their coastlines.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
By extending ``no leasing'' buffer zones to 125 miles away from the
State boundaries, this amendment is I must admit an improvement in the
current bill from the perspective of its Florida sponsors, and I
certainly understand that and commend them for the effort here.
However, as is in the underlying bill, the amendment gives effective
control over national resources to the States.
The OCS lands and oil and gas resources belong to all the people of
America. The name of every West Virginian, the name of other citizens
of our country are on the deed to these properties.
So these oil and gas resources belong to all the American people and
not just to those who reside in the adjacent States; and, as such,
Congress should retain the powers to make the decisions regarding those
national resources on those grounds. It is for that reason that I
object to the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I would suggest to the gentleman, with all due respect, that the
mountains of West Virginia, those beautiful mountains, belong to all
the people, too, but I would expect the people of West Virginia could
make the best decision regarding those mountains.
Mr. RAHALL. If the gentleman would yield, in response to the
gentleman, that was not an accurate statement. The mountains of West
Virginia do not belong to all the people of this land.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz.)
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from
Florida.
There are times in life when we must make difficult choices. The
Bilirakis, Wasserman Schultz and others amendment will add 125 miles of
protection and require the legislature to affirmatively vote to allow
drilling closer than that distance. It adds protection to the Outer
Continental Shelf coastline that we do not now enjoy.
The choice in front of us on this amendment is do we squeeze our eyes
shut tight, cross our fingers and pray that we will never have drilling
off of our coastline or do we act now and ensure that we do not? I
believe in controlling our own destiny. I want to know that there is
125 miles of protection that we do not now have off the eastern
coastline.
For those Members that are opposed to this bill, as I am, you can
vote in good conscience for this amendment and ensure a significant
amount of protection in the event that the bill passes. If this
amendment does not pass and the bill does, then we are left with the
possibility of having oil rigs within 50 miles of our coastline. That
is an unacceptable option.
We should act now to ensure that we have at least 125 miles of
protection off the eastern coast in the Outer Continental Shelf.
I urge the adoption of the Bilirakis-Wasserman Schultz amendment.
There are times in life when we must make choices, some of them are
easy and some of them are not. I firmly believe that as Members of
Congress we have an obligation to protect people and the environment
who have only our votes standing between them and devastating
consequences.
I am an opponent of oil drilling. I have never voted for drilling in
my 14 years as a public servant. But as public servants we must use
both our heart and our head when deciding what is best at any given
moment in time. The underlying legislation would be harmful to our
environment. Drilling 50 miles off our coast, which is possible under
the Pombo legislation is irresponsible. We should be investing in
alternative energy resources and truly breaking ourselves of the
addiction to oil referenced in President Bush's State of the Union
speech. But, we won't have that chance today and sadly, unless the tide
turns in this body, I fear that we won't ever have that chance.
I represent the cities of Ft. Lauderdale, Hollywood and Miami Beach,
from the ocean to the Everglades. Florida's coastline must be
protected. Our economy depends on our number one industry--tourism,
which brings in 86 million tourists annually, supports one million jobs
and generates $56 billion. There is a lot at stake for Florida.
That is why there are times in life when we must make difficult
choices. The Bilirakis, Wasserman Schultz and others amendment will add
125 miles of protection and require the legislature to affirmatively
vote to allow drilling closer than that distance. It adds protection to
the Outer Continental Shelf coastline that we do not now enjoy. The
choice in front of us on this amendment is do we squeeze our eyes shut
tight, cross our fingers and pray that we'll never have drilling off of
our coastline or do we act now and ensure that we don't? I believe in
controlling our own destiny. I want to know that there is 125 miles of
protection that we do not now have off the eastern coastline. For those
Members that are opposed to this bill, as I am, you can vote in good
conscience for this amendment and ensure a significant amount of
protection in the event that the bill passes. If this amendment does
not pass and the bill does, then we are left with the possibility of
having oil rigs within 50 miles of our coastline. That is an
unacceptable option. We should act now to ensure at least 125 miles of
protection off the eastern coastline.
At the end of the day, we are representatives of our communities and
our States, but we are ultimately United States Representatives,
charged with thinking about our whole country. In that role, we have an
obligation to ensure that the legislative products we send out of this
institution, with or without our votes contain the best content we can
develop. That requires the courage to compromise. Henry Clay said it
best,
``All legislation . . . is founded upon the principle of
mutual concession--Let him who elevates himself above
humanity, above its
[[Page H4874]]
weaknesses, its infirmities, its wants, its necessities, say,
if he pleases, ``I never will compromise''; but let no one
who is not above the frailties of our common nature disdain
compromise.''
The coastline of the Unites States of America must have the maximum
protection we can attain for her. The Bilirakis-Wasserman Schultz
amendment does that. Is it perfection? No, but if we live for
perfection, we risk failure. The failure to protect our environment as
much as we can is not an option. This amendment provides that
protection for in this legislation. Without it, our environment faces
grave danger.
Announcement by the Acting Chairman
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Chair would ask Members not to step in front
of someone who is speaking.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon).
Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for
yielding.
I rise in opposition to the Bilirakis amendment. He is a good friend
of mine. I do not agree with him on this issue.
I represent about 75 miles of coastline. We had no spills from
Katrina and Rita. You cannot see an oil derrick beyond about 40 miles,
and I think the language in the bill the chairman has put in there is
very good. You have got 50 miles of protection, and then the State, if
it wants to allow drilling 50 to 100 miles, it can.
Let us face it, gas is at $3 a gallon. Renewable energy resources are
not there yet. I think we need to explore that.
Jeepers, I drive a hybrid vehicle. I drove up here just now in a
hybrid vehicle. But we need fuel, and I think this is a very, very good
bill, and I think the Bilirakis amendment goes too far. I would
encourage all my colleagues, as somebody from Florida, vote ``no'' on
the Bilirakis amendment.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 45 seconds to the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Boyd).
Mr. BOYD. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
There are some provisions in the underlying Pombo bill that are very
onerous, and one of them in particular is the opt-in/opt-out language,
particularly opt-out, which most of us that have served in the State
legislature understand that there are a thousand ways to kill
legislation which you would have to opt out.
The opt-in language is much better. So if you are opposed to the
legislation, I would strongly request that you support the Bilirakis
amendment which will fix the onerous language that is in the Pombo bill
which requires an opt-out by the State legislature.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Peterson), one of the cosponsors of the original
underlying bill.
Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman.
This is a very important amendment that should not pass. We have
worked very hard. There has been a lot of compromise in this bill. We
have given a lot of shoreline protection, 50 miles locked up, total
State control. They have to opt out. The next 50-miles is rich with gas
up and down our coast, and this country needs natural gas to fuel the
industries that employ the blue collar workers of this country.
If we wait for Houses and Senates and governors to agree, I served in
one for 20 years. It takes a long time. We cannot add years to the
process. We need to open up our coastlines. We need to allow the States
to have to opt out.
There will be a debate in every coastline State, and I am confident
that in many States the vote will be to open up for natural gas
specifically because of the need and because of the volume, that it is
there to preserve the jobs in this country and keep this country
competitive.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Wexler).
Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support this vital amendment that
would extend the prohibition on offshore drilling from 100 to 125 miles
off the coast. The amendment would also require States to proactively
opt in, as has been described, to drilling, giving States that do not
want to drill the ability to do so clearly.
This amendment is vital to coastal States as it provides further
protection from drilling, and I would urge everyone to support it.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman.
Again, I want to congratulate the gentleman from West Virginia for
his leadership on this issue and on the bill this afternoon, and I want
to congratulate the Florida delegation for their success in improving a
bad bill but not changing the fundamental nature of the bill. It is a
bad bill, but it is an improvement, and I give them credit for that,
but it should not be in any way interpreted as a reason to vote for the
bill.
Again, jobs come from energy. The energy comes from leases that have
already been given over to oil companies, 80 percent of which have
never been drilled on, but it has already happened. The Bush
administration says that the area already open is where 80 percent of
the oil and gas off our shores is.
The big issue that we are all going to have to vote on final passage
is whether or not we are going to allow a transfer of $600 billion from
46 States that now receive that $600 billion as a promise over the next
several decades, or we are going to allow the oil companies to give
that money to four States, even though the drilling is on Federal land,
even though those leases have already been obtained by the oil
companies but they have been waiting for the price of oil to go to $70
a barrel, which is where it is now. We do not have to give them any
additional incentives.
This bill makes no sense whatsoever. It runs totally contrary to the
economics of energy, and President Bush has now sent us a letter and
asked us to not allow this $600 billion to go down here but to keep it
up here in the Federal budget that can be used to keep our budget
balanced.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 25 seconds to the gentlewoman
from Florida (Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite).
Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank the
gentleman.
Mr. Chairman, this is a very important amendment that is going to
protect the coastlines not just in Florida. This is not just a Florida
issue, but it is going to protect the coastlines by another 25 miles.
The 25-miles can make a real difference to people who live near the
coastline. The existing moratorium is limited in scope and can be done
away with in the Florida area.
This is a bipartisan amendment. We heard from two Members of the
other side who also support it, and I urge support for the amendment.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Florida
(Mr. Stearns) for the purposes of a unanimous consent request.
(Mr. STEARNS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I thank my distinguished colleague for all
his leadership on this issue, going back, way back, and I rise in
strong support of this amendment. I thank my friend for his leadership.
I rise today in strong support of this amendment and I thank my
friend, Mr. Bilirakis and my other Florida colleagues for offering it.
This amendment ensures that no oil or natural gas leasing occurs within
125 miles of a State's coastline unless the State requests leasing.
This amendment provides the States with real authority to protect their
coastlines and I urge its adoption.
We can all agree that the United States is far too reliant on
imported sources of energy. Currently we import 60 percent of our oil
demand, and by 2025 that number will increase to nearly 75 percent. In
addition, the rising price of natural gas is causing serious problems
to many different sectors of our economy.
This dependence on imported sources of energy is a threat to our
economy and to our national security. In addition to expanding
alternative fuels and employing clean fuel technologies, we need to
produce more oil and natural gas domestically.
The United States encompass a wide diversity featuring deserts,
tropical forests, and arctic tundra. The States vary, with some
dependent on agriculture and others on manufacturing. States such as
Alaska rely on developing its natural resources, and I support the will
of the Alaskan people to open their land to oil and gas development.
However, my State of Florida has a different reliance on its natural
resources, maintaining
[[Page H4875]]
our pristine beaches and waters that could be damaged by offshore
drilling. If Alabama or Louisiana wants to permit leasing off its
shores, then such leasing should be allowed. But, if my State of
Florida has concerns about the effect leasing would have on its fragile
ecosystem and its tourism economy, then Florida should be have the
authority to ban leasing off its shores.
The underlying bill opens areas to oil and gas leasing that are
currently under moratorium while protecting the rights of States to
control activities off their shores. As written, H.R. 4761 gives States
1 year from the date of enactment to decide whether to permit or deny
natural gas leasing in the area between 50 and 100 miles of their
coastlines. If a state does not act, however, leasing can occur. Thus,
States have to act in order to prevent leasing between 50 and 100
miles.
This amendment seeks to increase the power States would have in
deciding whether or not to allow leasing off their shores. It would
prohibit oil and gas leasing within 125 miles of a State's coast unless
the Governor and State legislature agree to permit leasing in this
area. Instead of having the State take action to prevent leasing, as
the DOER Act would require, leasing could only occur within 125 miles
of the coast if the State explicitly allows it.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, in a nation as diverse and with as many
competing interests as the United States, it is important to return
greater authority to the States so they can control activities 125
miles offshore. This amendment does that and I urge its adoption.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Chairman, I yield the remaining 20 seconds to the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart).
Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I have always opposed
offshore oil drilling. This amendment extends the protection an
additional 25 miles. It is a good amendment. Please support it.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the
noes appeared to have it.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida will
be postponed.
Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Bonner) having assumed the chair, Mr. LaHood, Acting Chairman of the
Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 4761) to
provide for exploration, development, and production activities for
mineral resources on the Outer Continental Shelf, and for other
purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.
____________________