PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Dexter, Maxine [D-OR-3] · D–OR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 11, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.10256 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.10256 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.10256 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.10256 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2026-09-03 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
This proposal would change rules for reducing oil and gas royalty payments and for counting transportation costs when calculating royalties. It would repeal or remove provisions concerning the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska, require annual reports on royalty relief, and standardize transportation allowances. Those allowances could not exceed either 30% of production value or actual and reasonable transportation costs. The changes would affect oil and gas royalty calculations and the federal agencies administering them.
Gulf of mexico royalty relief (1) Repeal Section 344 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 15904) is repealed.
Section 8(a)(3)(B) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1337(a)(3)(B)) is amended by striking and in the Planning Areas offshore Alaska after West longitude.
Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter
the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Office of Natural Resources Revenue, shall issue or revise regulations to establish standardized transportation allowances for the calculation of oil and gas royalties
Each standardized transportation allowance established by regulation under subsection (a) shall not exceed the lesser of— (1) the amount that is equal to 30 percent of the total value of the oil and gas that is produced; and (2) the amount that is equal to actual and reasonable transportation costs.
Section 1 would name the bill the Taxpayer Relief from Big Oil Act.
This Act may be cited as the Taxpayer Relief from Big Oil Act.
Section 2 would repeal section 344 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, identified here as a Gulf of Mexico royalty-relief provision. Regulations issued under that section before enactment would lose their legal effect.
(a) Gulf of mexico royalty relief (1) Repeal Section 344 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 15904) is repealed. (2) Regulations Any regulations issued under section 344 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 before the date of enactment of this section shall have no force or effect.
Section 2 would remove the words “and in the Planning Areas offshore Alaska” from section 8(a)(3)(B) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act. The supplied text does not reproduce the surrounding law needed to explain the full effect of that deletion.
(b) Alaska royalty relief (1) Provisions relating to planning areas offshore alaska Section 8(a)(3)(B) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1337(a)(3)(B)) is amended by striking and in the Planning Areas offshore Alaska after West longitude.
For the naval petroleum reserve in Alaska, section 2 would delete specified language from section 104(a) of the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act of 1976. It would also remove paragraphs (2) through (6) of section 107(i), remove subsection 107(k), and renumber later subsections. The underlying provisions are not reproduced in the bundle.
(2) Provisions relating to naval petroleum reserve in alaska The Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act of 1976 is amended— (A) in section 104(a) (42 U.S.C. 6504(a)) by striking to the extent consistent with the requirements of this Act for the exploration of the reserve; and (B) in section 107 (42 U.S.C. 6506a)— (i) in subsection (i)— (I) by striking (1) In general.—; and (II) by striking paragraphs (2) through (6); (ii) by striking subsection (k); and (iii) by redesignating subsections (l) through (p) as subsections (k) through (o), respectively.
The directors of the Bureau of Land Management and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management would have to report on the preceding year's royalty relief within 90 days after enactment and annually afterward. Reports would go to the House Natural Resources Committee and the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.
(c) Royalty relief report Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Director of the Bureau of Land Management and the Director of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management shall submit to the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate a report detailing, with respect to the preceding year—
The reports would count onshore and offshore royalty-relief applicants, applications approved or denied, and wells approved or denied. They would include any agency reasoning provided for approvals and count approved wells that produced oil or gas during the six months beginning on their application date.
(1) the number of onshore and offshore oil and gas royalty relief applicants; (2) the number of onshore and offshore oil and gas royalty relief applications approved or denied and any reasoning provided by the agency for approvals; (3) the number of wells approved and denied for royalty relief; (4) the number of wells approved for royalty relief that produced oil or gas during the period of 6 months beginning on the date on which an application for royalty relief for the well was made;
Reports would also describe average production from approved wells, the duration of royalty relief, new royalty rates for approved applications, and any estimates of resulting differences in revenue and production. This is a reporting requirement, not evidence that those differences would have a particular size or direction.
(5) the average amount of production from wells for which royalty relief was approved; (6) the length of royalty relief periods; (7) the new royalty rate for approved applications; and (8) any estimates of the difference in revenue and production resulting from the approved royalty relief.
Section 3 would require the Interior Secretary, through the Office of Natural Resources Revenue, to issue or revise regulations within one year after enactment. The regulations would standardize transportation allowances—the transportation-cost amounts recognized when calculating royalties—for each Bureau of Land Management oil and gas administrative area and each Outer Continental Shelf planning area producing oil or gas.
(a) In general Not later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Office of Natural Resources Revenue, shall issue or revise regulations to establish standardized transportation allowances for the calculation of oil and gas royalties for— (1) each Bureau of Land Management oil and gas administrative boundaries; and (2) each Outer Continental Shelf planning area in which oil or gas is produced.
Each standardized transportation allowance would be capped at the lower of 30% of the total value of oil and gas produced or actual and reasonable transportation costs. The bill sets a maximum, rather than requiring every allowance to equal that maximum.
(b) Maximum transportation allowance Each standardized transportation allowance established by regulation under subsection (a) shall not exceed the lesser of— (1) the amount that is equal to 30 percent of the total value of the oil and gas that is produced; and (2) the amount that is equal to actual and reasonable transportation costs.
The supplied action snapshot, updated September 11, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Natural Resources on September 3, 2026. It does not establish what happened after that snapshot.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-11T16:09:36Z. 2026-09-03: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources. 2026-09-03: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-09-03. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy change attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion applies only to that version, not other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish the contents of accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow preferential benefit, special exemption, or carve-out was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion applies only to that version; missing statutory context limits assessment of the amendments' full effects.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 11, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI