PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 19, 2012
Department of Energy Reorganization Act of 2012 - Establishes within the Department of Energy (DOE) an Office of Federal Energy Production, headed by a Director appointed by the Secretary of Energy.
Transfers to such Director the current functions of the Directors of: (1) the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, (2) the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, and (3) the Bureau of Land Management of the Department of the Interior with respect to oil and gas development and renewable energy production.
Establishes within DOE the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, to whose Director are transferred the functions and regulatory authority of the Director of the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement of the Department of the Interior. Terminates the latter Bureau upon completion of all transfers.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Establishes within DOE the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, to whose Director are transferred the functions of the Director of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management of the Department of the Interior. Terminates the latter Bureau upon completion of all transfers.
Amends the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, with respect to the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) oil and gas leasing program, to require the Secretary to certify that the oil and gas leasing program prepared will best meet national energy needs for the five-year period following its approval or reapproval. Directs the Secretary to amend the program to include additional lease sales in additional areas if it is determined that the United States will require more than one million barrels of oil per day for the next fiscal year from foreign sources other than Canada and Mexico.
Amends the Mineral Leasing Act to authorize appropriations to the Secretary to implement oil shale and gilsonite leases and permits.
Exempts DOE from the jurisdiction of the Equal Access to Justice Act.
People & committees
Sen. Coats, Daniel [R-IN] · R–IN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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.3404 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.3404 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.3404 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.3404 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.