PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 35 · Passed Senate amended · Sep 16, 2014
BLM Permit Processing Improvement Act of 2014 - Amends the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to make the Federal Permit Streamlining Project program permanent.
Amends the Mineral Leasing Act to direct the Secretary of the Interior to collect for each of FY2016-FY2026 a fee of $9,500 for each new application for a drilling permit. Allocates specified percentages of such fees to: (1) the field offices that collected the fees used to process protests, leases, and permits; and (2) the BLM Permit Processing Improvement Fund, now divided into a Rental Account and a Fee Account.
Prohibits the Secretary, during FY2016-FY2026, from implementing a rulemaking that would enable an increase in fees to recover additional costs related to processing applications for drilling permits.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Makes the Fund available to the Secretary for expenditure for the coordination and processing of oil and gas use authorizations on Indian trust mineral estate land (as well as onshore federal land, as under current law).
Directs the Secretary to use: (1) the Rental Account and the Fee Account for this coordination and processing of oil and gas use authorizations, and (2) the Rental Account also for training for development of expertise related to coordinating and processing these authorizations.
Amends the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act of 1982 to make the rate of interest allowed and paid or credited for any royalty overpayment equal to the sum of the federal short-term rate plus one percentage point.
People & committees
Sen. Udall, Tom [D-NM] · D–NM
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Held at the desk.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Passed Senate with amendments by Unanimous Consent. (text: CR S5649)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with amendments by Unanimous Consent.(text: CR S5649)
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S5649)
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 113-491.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
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.2440 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.2440 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.2440 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.2440 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.