Senator Cynthia Lummis, U.S. Senator for Wyoming | Official U.S. Senate headshot
Senator Cynthia Lummis, U.S. Senator for Wyoming | Official U.S. Senate headshot
Washington, D.C.— Senate Western Caucus Chair Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) expressed strong opposition to the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) latest oil and gas leasing regulations. Lummis criticized the new rule, which imposes higher fees and royalties, limits the number of parcels offered at lease sales, and raises bonding requirements.
"President Biden continues to wage war on domestic energy and has created untenable rules that make it nearly impossible to produce energy on federal lands. While this administration continues to eliminate American energy jobs and erode our energy independence, I will continue fighting for the West’s energy industry by cutting red tape to unleash American energy," said Lummis.
The BLM recently finalized the Fluid Mineral Leases and Leasing Process rule, significantly increasing royalties, rates, minimum bids, and costs for oil and gas producers operating on federal lands. The rule's substantial bonding requirements pose challenges for small producers. Republicans were successful in removing a similar provision from the Democrats' Inflation Reduction Act under the Byrd rule.
Despite a Senate vote of 50-50 to reject these policies, the BLM proceeded with the changes, including raising the minimum lease bond amount from $10,000 per well to $150,000 per well. Moreover, the minimum statewide bond has surged from $25,000 to $500,000, and companies must now bid a minimum of $10 per acre at auction, compared to the previous $2 per acre requirement.
These developments have sparked concerns within the energy industry, with stakeholders expressing apprehension about the impact of the new regulations on oil and gas production on federal lands. Lummis reiterated her commitment to advocating for the interests of the West's energy sector amidst what she perceives as detrimental policy changes.
The BLM's decision to implement these stringent regulations has ignited further debate on the future of energy production and the balance between environmental concerns and economic interests in the United States.
Alerts Sign-up