PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 11, 2025
Federal Lands and Waters Leasing Transparency Act
This bill directs the Department of the Interior to provide explanations to the highest bidders when it rejects their bids for certain offshore oil and gas leases. The bill also prohibits courts from invalidating or delaying certain onshore and offshore oil and gas leases.
When Interior determines that the federal government will not receive the fair market value for offshore lease tracts on submerged lands of the Outer Continental Shelf from the highest bidder, then Interior must provide a report to the bidder that explains the basis for the determination. If the bid was subject to a resource and economic evaluation, the report must include information on how the bid compares to specified valuation metrics. These requirements apply to lease sales in which Interior received at least one bid and did not issue a lease to the highest bidder.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Additionally, courts may not prevent Interior from issuing certain onshore oil and gas leases by a 60-day statutory deadline unless the lease would violate federal law.
Further, the bill prohibits civil actions that challenge certain offshore oil and gas lease sales from (1) invalidating leases issued under such sales; and (2) delaying the consideration of plans, documents, or applications for a federal authorization or approval of activities for a lease. If a court finds that the sale was not carried out in compliance with federal law, the court must (1) remand the matter to Interior, and (2) direct Interior to correct the noncompliance.
People & committees
Rep. Higgins, Clay [R-LA-3] · R–LA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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: Mar 4, 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.1194 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.1194 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.1194 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.1194 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 · 2025-02-11 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 require explanations to certain offshore oil and gas bidders when the government determines their bids do not offer fair market value. It would limit court orders preventing onshore leases from being issued by a 60-day deadline, unless issuing the lease would violate federal law. It would also protect offshore sales and leases from being overturned or blocked when a court finds the sale violated federal law.
If the Secretary determines pursuant to subsection (a)(4) that the Federal Government will not receive the fair market value from a bid for a covered lease tract, the Secretary shall provide to the bidder a report that explains the basis for such determination.
No court order may prevent the Secretary from issuing a lease by such 60 day deadline unless the court finds that the issuance of the lease would violate a requirement of Federal law.
if, in a civil action described in subsection (a), a court finds that the offshore lease sale was not carried out in compliance with Federal law— (1) the court shall not— (A) set aside, vacate, or enjoin the offshore lease sale; (B) set aside, vacate, or enjoin the leases issued pursuant to the offshore lease sale;
Section 1 would name the bill the Federal Lands and Waters Leasing Transparency Act.
This Act may be cited as the Federal Lands and Waters Leasing Transparency Act.
Section 2 would require the Secretary to explain a determination that a bid would not provide fair market value. This requirement would cover a tract only when the Secretary held a lease sale, received at least one bid, and did not issue a lease to the highest responsible qualified bidder.
If the Secretary determines pursuant to subsection (a)(4) that the Federal Government will not receive the fair market value from a bid for a covered lease tract, the Secretary shall provide to the bidder a report that explains the basis for such determination.
The term covered lease tract means a lease tract for which the Secretary— (A) held a lease sale; (B) received at least one bid; and (C) did not issue a lease to the highest responsible qualified bidder.
If the bid was qualified and underwent a resource and economic evaluation, the report would also have to explain how it compares with four named measures of the tract's value. The bill names these measures but does not explain their calculations.
If the bid was a qualified bid that was subject to a resource and economic evaluation, the report shall include information on how such qualified bid relates to the Mean Range of Values, Delay-adjusted Mean Range of Values, Adjusted Delayed Value, and Revised Arithmetic Average Measure for the covered lease tract.
Section 3 would amend the Mineral Leasing Act to restrict court orders that prevent onshore oil and gas leases from being issued by the referenced 60-day deadline. A court could prevent issuance by that deadline only if it found that issuing the lease would violate a requirement of federal law.
Section 17(b)(1)(A) of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 226(b)(1)(A)) is amended by inserting No court order may prevent the Secretary from issuing a lease by such 60 day deadline unless the court finds that the issuance of the lease would violate a requirement of Federal law.
Section 4 would provide that a civil lawsuit challenging an offshore oil and gas lease sale cannot affect the validity of leases issued through that sale or delay consideration of exploration plans, development documents, drilling permit applications, or other federal approvals for activities on those leases. These restrictions would apply notwithstanding other laws.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a civil action challenging an offshore oil and gas lease sale conducted under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.) shall not— (1) affect the validity of any lease issued under such an offshore lease sale; and (2) cause a delay in the timelines for the consideration of any exploration plan, development plan, development operations coordination document, applications for permit to drill, or other application for a Federal agency authorization or approval for activities on a lease issued under such an offshore lease sale.
Even if a court found that an offshore lease sale violated federal law, Section 4 would prohibit it from overturning or blocking the sale or resulting leases. It would also prohibit the court from blocking the Interior Secretary from issuing leases to the sale's highest bidders.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if, in a civil action described in subsection (a), a court finds that the offshore lease sale was not carried out in compliance with Federal law— (1) the court shall not— (A) set aside, vacate, or enjoin the offshore lease sale; (B) set aside, vacate, or enjoin the leases issued pursuant to the offshore lease sale; or (C) enjoin the Secretary of the Interior from issuing leases to the highest bidders in the challenged offshore lease sale;
When a court found an offshore sale unlawful, it would have to send the matter back to the Interior Secretary and require correction of the violation. The Secretary would have to continue processing plans and applications for activities under leases from the challenged sale in accordance with the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act. This would require continued processing, rather than automatic approval.
(2) the court shall remand the matter to the Secretary of the Interior and require the Secretary of the Interior to correct the noncompliance; and (3) the Secretary of the Interior shall continue to process all exploration plans, development and production plans, development operations coordination documents, applications for permit to drill, and other applications for a Federal agency authorization or other approval for activities requested under any lease issued under the challenged offshore lease sale in accordance with the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.).
The supplied actions snapshot, updated March 4, 2026, records introduction in the House on February 11, 2025, and referral that day to the Natural Resources and Judiciary committees, each for provisions within its jurisdiction.
Source snapshot updated 2026-03-04T16:07:41Z.
2025-02-11: Introduced in House
2025-02-11: Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-11. 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 provision attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in 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 absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
The supplied introduced text contains a targeted exception to judicial remedies within its main leasing policy. This classification describes the legal protection and is not a judgment about its justification.
Section 4 would give offshore oil and gas leaseholders and highest bidders a specific legal protection when a court finds their lease sale violated federal law: the court could not overturn or block the sale or leases, or block issuance to the highest bidders. This protection directly serves the bill's leasing policy, while the requirement to correct the violation would remain.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if, in a civil action described in subsection (a), a court finds that the offshore lease sale was not carried out in compliance with Federal law— (1) the court shall not— (A) set aside, vacate, or enjoin the offshore lease sale; (B) set aside, vacate, or enjoin the leases issued pursuant to the offshore lease sale; or (C) enjoin the Secretary of the Interior from issuing leases to the highest bidders in the challenged offshore lease sale;
(2) the court shall remand the matter to the Secretary of the Interior and require the Secretary of the Interior to correct the noncompliance;
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Mar 4, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI