PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 113-69.
Congressional Research Service
Version 82 · Passed Senate without amendment · Dec 20, 2013
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on May 14, 2013. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Amends the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to revise the list of Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Federal Permit Streamlining Pilot Project offices. Replaces the Miles City, Montana, field office with the Montana/Dakotas State Office, Montana (Billings). Replaces the Buffalo Field Office, Wyoming, with the High Plains District Office, Wyoming.
People & committees
Rep. Cramer, Kevin [R-ND-At Large] · R–ND
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 113-69.
Became Public Law No: 113-69.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources discharged by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S9068-9069)
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources discharged by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S9068-9069)
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 415 - 1 (Roll no. 147). (text: CR H2632)
House roll call 147 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 415 - 1 (Roll no. 147).(text: CR H2632)
House roll call 147 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2634)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 767.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2632-2633)
Mr. Bishop (UT) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 33.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 113-55.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 113-55.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H572-573)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 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.767 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.767 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.767 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.767 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.