Bill Overview
Title: Restoring Community Input and Public Protections in Oil and Gas Leasing Act of 2021
Description: This bill modifies several provisions related to oil and gas leasing on public lands. Among other requirements, the bill replaces the competitive auction process with a competitive-sealed bidding process. It also eliminates non-competitive bidding. Additionally, the bill increases royalty rates, rental rates, and the minimum bid amount. Further, the bill creates a fee for nominating lands for leasing. Lease sales must be held in each state no more than three times per year instead of quarterly. The bill also decreases lease term durations from 10 to 5 years. Certain lease information must be made available on public websites, including the names of all current and former lessees and operators. The bill also adds a number of new provisions related to protection of private surface estate owners. Finally, the bill establishes requirements to protect water resources, including by requiring oil or gas operators to replace certain water supplies affected by drilling, hydraulic fracturing (i.e., fracking), or production operations. In addition, the Bureau of Land Management must issue regulations governing the use of fracking under oil and gas leases for federal lands. The regulations must require (1) baseline water testing, and (2) public disclosure of each chemical used for fracking.
Sponsors: Rep. Levin, Mike [D-CA-49]
Target Audience
Population: People living in countries with oil and gas operations on public lands
Estimated Size: 5000000
- Oil and gas companies operating on public lands will be directly impacted due to changes in lease terms, increased costs due to higher royalty rates, and more stringent requirements for bidding.
- State governments that manage public lands and receive a portion of leasing revenues will also be affected due to changes in frequency and terms of oil and gas lease sales.
- Private surface estate owners on lands with oil and gas activity will see changes through enhanced protections and requirements for resource and environmental safeguards.
- Communities located near oil and gas operations on public lands might experience changes in environmental quality and community health due to stricter regulations on fracking and water resource protection.
Reasoning
- The policy focuses on changes primarily affecting oil and gas companies, state governments, and communities near oil and gas operations on public lands by increasing transparency, regulatory burdens, and costs associated with oil and gas leasing.
- The states most affected will likely include those with significant public land oil and gas operations such as Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, and potentially others.
- Residents and companies in these areas might experience changes in job opportunities, environmental conditions, and local governance due to increased lease costs and reduced lease flexibility.
- Communities may benefit from increased environmental protections and enhanced transparency of oil and gas leasing processes, affecting community well-being differently based on local dependence on oil and gas industries versus environmental and health priorities.
Simulated Interviews
Oil Rig Operator (Casper, Wyoming)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about my job security if the new policies make it too expensive for companies to continue operations here.
- The transparency and water protection rules are good for the community, but I'm concerned about immediate job impacts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Environmental Scientist (Santa Fe, New Mexico)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've been waiting for regulations like this to protect our water resources.
- This policy helps guide sustainable use of our natural resources.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
State Government Employee (Denver, Colorado)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy will streamline how we manage leases and improve public trust.
- Changes to lease sales and terms may temporarily affect revenues but increase sustainability of land use.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Landowner (Cheyenne, Wyoming)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Finally, there will be better protections for landowners like myself against big oil companies.
- The royalties might be higher, but the trade-off for protection seems worth it.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Oil Company Executive (Boulder, Colorado)
Age: 35 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is going to increase operational costs significantly, though it's a chance to improve public image through compliance.
- There will likely be short-term financial impacts, but long-term stability might improve.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Fracking Operator (Farmington, New Mexico)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The water protection rules might make operations tougher, leading to potential job cuts.
- We need to balance the jobs with good environmental practices.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
University Student (Albuquerque, New Mexico)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see this policy as a win for environmental protection and long-term sustainability.
- It shows that we’re starting to take community health seriously.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Local Government Official (Boise, Idaho)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our community will benefit from better-informed decisions on leasing and environmental impacts.
- The restrictions will help us balance economic and environmental goals.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Oil and Gas Finance Analyst (Houston, Texas)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- These changes could lead to initial financial hits, but increased royalties could eventually benefit all stakeholders.
- There may be less speculation in bidding, better usage of lands.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Retired Teacher (Rapid City, South Dakota)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This legislation will provide transparency and improve environmental practices which align with community concerns.
- I've seen the negative impacts of oil drilling first hand. This is needed.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $30000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $40000000)
Year 2: $31000000 (Low: $21000000, High: $41000000)
Year 3: $32000000 (Low: $22000000, High: $42000000)
Year 5: $34000000 (Low: $24000000, High: $44000000)
Year 10: $36000000 (Low: $26000000, High: $46000000)
Year 100: $40000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $50000000)
Key Considerations
- Impact of increased costs on oil and gas operators' willingness to bid for leases.
- Technological and operational adjustments needed to comply with new environmental regulations.
- Effect on state budgets due to changes in royalty distributions.