PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 15, 2011
Secure All Facilities to Effectively Guard the United States Against and Respond to Dangerous Spills Act of 2011 or the SAFEGUARDS Act of 2011 - Amends the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to: (1) prohibit the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) from issuing a permit or other authorization for exploration for or production of oil and gas under a lease under such Act unless an oil spill response plan for the operations of the facility on which the activity is conducted has been approved by the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating as meeting requirements for such a plan under provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly known as the Clean Water Act); (2) require the Secretary to approve an oil and gas exploration plan within 90 (currently 30) days of submission, with a 60-day extension authorized if the Secretary certifies that it's necessary to allow adequate consideration of the plan; and (3) prohibit an exploration plan from being eligible for a categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
Amends the Clean Water Act to require: (1) the President to issue regulations to require owners or operators of offshore facilities to have their plans for responding to a worst case discharge of oil or a hazardous substance approved by the Secretary of the Department in which the Coast Guard is operating; and (2) such worst case plans of owners and operators of tank vessels, nontank vessels, offshore facilities, or onshore facilities to include plans for responding to uncontrolled or uncontained discharges from wells.
Requires the National Contingency Plan for removal of oil and hazardous substances to: (1) include water quality monitoring by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of waters affected by discharges of oil or other hazardous substances that begins not later than 48 hours after such a discharge is reported; (2) include designation of the Commandant of the Coast Guard as the National Incident Commander for activities in response to a discharge that results in a substantial threat to the public health or welfare of the United States if such a discharge affects waters with respect to which the Coast Guard is responsible for response efforts under the Plan; and (3) be updated by the President every five years, including separate response plans for discharges of oil or other hazardous materials into or upon land and water.
People & committees
Rep. Young, C. W. Bill [R-FL-10] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, 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 Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, 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 currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. 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.1664 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.1664 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.1664 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.1664 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.