PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 21, 2015
Accounting for Methane in Production through Loophole Elimination with Oil and Gas Royalties or the AMPLE Oil and Gas Royalties Act
This bill amends the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act of 1982 to require, with respect to federal oil and gas leases, a lessee or its designee of a lease in a unit or communitization agreement that contains only federal leases with the same royalty rate and funds distribution, or a lessee or its designee of a lease that is not contained in a unit or communitization agreement, to report and pay royalties on oil and gas production each month based on the actual volume of oil and gas withdrawn from the reservoir by or on behalf of that lessee, including all oil and gas not sold by or on behalf of that lessee. (Currently, such lessees pay royalties on oil and gas production based on only the actual volume of production sold by or on behalf of that lessee.)
"Oil and gas withdrawn from the reservoir" is defined as any oil and gas that is produced, sold, vented, flared, used for beneficial purposes, leaked, or otherwise emitted during production.
People & committees
Rep. Lipinski, Daniel [D-IL-3] · D–IL
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 House Committee on Natural Resources.
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 12, 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.3140 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.3140 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.3140 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.3140 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.