PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 509.
Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · Jul 7, 1994
Amends the Mineral Leasing Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to lease certain public domain lands in Garfield County, Colorado, for oil and gas exploration, development, and production. Conditions the authorization upon the payment of a royalty. Authorizes the Secretary to establish a sliding scale royalty of between 12.5 percent and 25 percent in amount or value of the production removed or sold from the lease. Mandates that: (1) the royalty payable to the United States be paid in crude oil of a quality acceptable to the Secretary of Energy produced on or off the reserve and shall be deposited to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR); (2) 50 percent of the value that the Secretary establishes for the royalty oil be paid to the State from amounts received which otherwise would be deposited to the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts; and (3) with respect to such royalty oil there shall be no payment to the reclamation fund or the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts. Permits such lease to include the transfer, at fair market value, of federally owned oil and gas equipment suitable for hydrocarbon development on such lands. Instructs the Secretary to take all actions necessary to ensure that the cost of compliance with this Act is minimized.
People & committees
Sen. Campbell, Ben Nighthorse [D-CO] · D–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 509.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Johnston under the authority of the order of Jun 27, 94 with amendments. With written report No. 103-303.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Johnston under the authority of the order of Jun 27, 94 with amendments. With written report No. 103-303.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with amendments favorably.
Subcommittee on Mineral Resources Development. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 103-614.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources requested executive comment from Department of the Interior, and Office of Management and Budget.
Referred to Subcommittee on Mineral Resources Development.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S8233-8234)
Introduced in Senate
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: 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 S.1170 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 S.1170 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 S.1170 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 S.1170 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.