The Year That Was(n’t) – D.C. Action Was Rare

The 112th Congress (January 2011 to January 2013) has passed little legislation – in fact, it set a record for inactivity, and no bills impacting petroleum exploration and production have been passed.

A few pieces of legislation, however, have passed either the Senate or the House and could be resurrected in the lame-duck session, starting after the Nov. 6 election, or could be reintroduced in the 113th Congress in 2013.

A look at what has been accomplished so far in the 112th Congress is revealing:

  • Slightly over 10,000 bills have been introduced.
  • Twenty-five bills relating to oil and gas exploration and production have been introduced, but none have passed both houses of Congress.
  • One hundred seventy nine bills have passed both houses of Congress and been signed into law by the president. That total represents less than 2 percent of bills introduced.
  • Of those 179, 21 percent were to rename a federal building.

u In comparison, the 110th Congress, which introduced a record 14,000 bills, passed 460, or 3.3 percent, of which 32 percent renamed a federal building.

This lack of accomplishment, according to most pundits and citizens, reflects a body that is highly polarized and that lacks a large cadre of members committed to compromise. Given the historic inaction, Congress is unlikely to pass any energy bills in the lame-duck session, between the Nov. 6 elections and when the next Congress starts on Jan. 3, 2013.


What follows is a summary of oil and gas exploration and production legislation that was introduced into the 112th Congress. This serves as not only a history lesson, but a predictive tool.

At least some of the bills introduced into the 112th Congress are likely to be reintroduced in the future and some may become law.

Many bills were introduced while a controversial issue was in the news. For example, in the first year of the 112th Congress bills were introduced in both the House (H.R.1084) and Senate (S. 587) to repeal the oil industry exemption to the Safe Drinking Water Act and require that companies disclose the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing. This was when the movie “Gasland” had recently come out and fracking with a “k” had just entered the popular lexicon.

Both bills have been ignored by Congress since they were introduced in early 2011.

In May 2012 the Bureau of Land Management announced draft regulations that would require proof of wellbore integrity (a cement bond log) before a well on federal land could be hydraulically fractured. This action stimulated the introduction of a suite of bills that would allow states to regulate wells on federal lands:

  • H.R. 4322, to clarify that a state has the sole authority to regulate hydraulic fracturing on federal land within the boundaries of the state.
  • H.R. 6235, Federal Lands Energy Regulatory Certainty Act of 2012.
  • S. 2248, Fracturing Regulations are Effective in State Hands Act.

None of these bills has made it to the first step of a committee hearing.

Of 25 oil and gas exploration and production bills introduced, 14 of the bills would require the government to increase leasing of federal lands, onshore and offshore, and Native American lands.

For example, H.R. 1230, Restarting American Offshore Leasing Now Act, would require a lease sale of lands offshore Virginia, and H.R. 4301, the Energy Exploration and Production to Achieve National Demand Act, would repeal the drilling moratorium in the eastern Gulf of Mexico. H.R. 1231, Reversing President Obama’s Offshore Moratorium Act, would require lease sales in the Atlantic Ocean, Pacific Ocean and eastern Gulf of Mexico.

Legislation to open the eastern Gulf of Mexico has been introduced in the past but has never gained much traction, perhaps because the citizens of Florida, regardless of their political affiliations, oppose drilling close to their shores.

Several of the bills impacting leasing apply specifically to Alaska federal lands and waters. For example, H.R. 2150, the National Petroleum Reserve Alaska (NPR-A) Access Act, would require:

  • At least one lease sale per year in NPR-A.
  • Timely development of surface infrastructure to support oil production.
  • A resource assessment of NPR-A by the U.S. Geological Survey.

This bill reflects another common theme in energy legislation introduced over the years: A government assessment of the undiscovered resource is required on the assumption that the information will stimulate or accelerate development.

The value of this requirement is dubious. Resource assessments of the 1002 Area of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf have not stimulated new leasing.

Three of the energy bills specify actions to improve the federal permitting process. For example, H.R. 4383, Streamlining Permitting of American Energy Act of 2012; H.R. 945, Streamlining America's Various Energy Needs Act; and H.R. 1115, Streamlining America's Various Energy Needs Act, would have federal agencies expedite their permit approval process.

Finally, several bills were introduced and one passed (H.R. 3765, Temporary Payroll Tax Cut Continuation Act of 2011, Public Law 112-78) to force the president to quickly approve the application for the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to Texas. The president did not approve the initial application, but the pipeline permitting process is continuing – haltingly.

Although the controversy continues and is extensively covered by the news media, the issue has not generated any legislation since December 2011.

Comments (0)

 

Policy Watch

Policy Watch - Edie Allison
Edie Allison began as the Director of the AAPG Geoscience and Energy Office in Washington D.C. in 2012.

Policy Watch

Policy Watch is a monthly column of the EXPLORER written by the director of AAPG's  Geoscience and Energy Office in Washington, D.C. *The first article appeared in February 2006 under the name "Washington Watch" and the column name was changed to "Policy Watch" in January 2013 to broaden the subject matter to a more global view.

View column archives

See Also: Bulletin Article

West Edmond field, located in central Oklahoma, is one of the largest oil accumulations in the Silurian–Devonian Hunton Group in this part of the Anadarko Basin. Production from all stratigraphic units in the field exceeds 170 million barrels of oil (MMBO) and 400 billion cubic feet of gas (BCFG), of which approximately 60 MMBO and 100 BCFG have been produced from the Hunton Group. Oil and gas are stratigraphically trapped to the east against the Nemaha uplift, to the north by a regional wedge-out of Hunton strata, and by intraformational diagenetic traps. Hunton Group reservoirs are the Bois d'Arc and Frisco Limestones, with lesser production from the Chimneyhill subgroup, Haragan Shale, and Henryhouse Formation.

Hunton Group cores from three wells that were examined petrographically indicate that complex diagenetic relations influence permeability and reservoir quality. Greatest porosity and permeability are associated with secondary dissolution in packstones and grainstones, forming hydrocarbon reservoirs. The overlying Devonian–Mississippian Woodford Shale is the major petroleum source rock for the Hunton Group in the field, based on one-dimensional and four-dimensional petroleum system models that were calibrated to well temperature and Woodford Shale vitrinite reflectance data. The source rock is marginally mature to mature for oil generation in the area of the West Edmond field, and migration of Woodford oil and gas from deeper parts of the basin also contributed to hydrocarbon accumulation.

Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/Bulletin-hero-2013-07jul.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 3770 Bulletin Article

Using diverse geologic and geophysical data from recent exploration and development, and experimental results of analysis of gas content, gas capacity, and gas composition, this article discusses how geologic, structural, and hydrological factors determine the heterogeneous distribution of gas in the Weibei coalbed methane (CBM) field.

The coal rank of the Pennsylvanian no. 5 coal seam is mainly low-volatile bituminous and semianthracite. The total gas content is 2.69 to 16.15 m3/t (95.00–570.33 scf/t), and gas saturation is 26.0% to 93.2%. Burial coalification followed by tectonically driven hydrothermal activity controls not only thermal maturity, but also the quality and quantity of thermogenic gas generated from the coal.

Gas composition indicates that the CBM is dry and of dominantly thermogenic origin. The thermogenic gases have been altered by fractionation that may be related to subsurface water movement in the southern part of the study area.

Three gas accumulation models are identified: (1) gas diffusion and long-distance migration of thermogenic gases to no-flow boundaries for sorption and minor conventional trapping, (2) hydrodynamic trapping of gas in structural lows, and (3) gas loss by hydrodynamic flushing. The first two models are applicable for the formation of two CBM enrichment areas in blocks B3 and B4, whereas the last model explains extremely low gas content and gas saturation in block B5. The variable gas content, saturation, and accumulation characteristics are mainly controlled by these gas accumulation models.

Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/variable-gas-content-saturation-and-accumulation.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 5687 Bulletin Article

See Also: CD DVD

Desktop /Portals/0/images/_site/AAPG-newlogo-vertical-morepadding.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 3936 CD-DVD

See Also: Digital Download

Desktop /Portals/0/images/_site/AAPG-newlogo-vertical-morepadding.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 5594 Digital Download

See Also: Field Seminar

This trip will visit the breathtaking coastal outcrops of turbidites, carbonate platforms, fluvial sediments and pillow lavas along the cliffs southeast of Melbourne. Come scramble down craggy slopes at Cape Liptrap to view superb outcrop-scale fold and thrust structures in Devonian turbidites, then take a 5 km hike along the adjacent coast where Cambrian ophiolites and exhumed amphibolites, faulted against trilobite-hosting Ordovician marls and Devonian reefal carbonates will be revealed. This will be followed by a trip to a site of Early Cretaceous fluvial rift sediments deposited during the initial separation of Antarctica from Australia to open the Gippsland Basin.

Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/FT4-The-Gippsland-Basin-hero.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 18997 Field Seminar