PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to proceed to consideration of measure, under the order of 5/16/2011, not having achieved 60 votes in the affirmative, withdrawn in Senate. (consideration: CR S3086)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 11, 2011
Offshore Production and Safety Act of 2011 - Amends the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to direct the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to require an exploration plan to incorporate a third-party reviewed response plan which describes the means and timeline to contain and terminate an ongoing discharge of oil.
Requires the Secretary to certify, as a prerequisite to plan approval, the technological feasibility of methods proposed to be used under a response plan, as demonstrated by the potential lessee through simulation, demonstration, or other means.
Directs the Secretary of Energy (DOE), acting through the DOE Office of Science, to use specified funds to study, in collaboration with the DOE Office of Fossil Energy, means of improving prevention methodologies and technological responses to oil spills and mitigating the effects of oil spills on natural habitat.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the DOE Secretary, as part of the study, to convene a task force to assess: (1) such methodologies and technological response to the blowout and explosion of the mobile offshore drilling unit Deepwater Horizon on April 20, 2010, and the resulting hydrocarbon releases into the environment; as well as (2) the adequacy of existing technologies for prevention and responses to deep water oil spills.
Directs the Comptroller General to study existing federal capabilities and legal authorities to prevent and respond to oil spills.
Instructs the Secretary to conduct certain oil and gas lease sales within specified deadlines.
States that such lease sales are considered to satisfy the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
Prohibits the Secretary from issuing a permit without ensuring that the proposed drilling operations meet all: (1) critical safety system requirements, including blowout prevention; and (2) oil spill response and containment requirements. Requires the Secretary to decide whether to issue a permit within 30 days after receiving an application. Allows up to two 15-day extensions of such deadline. Prescribes implementation procedures.
Imposes a deadline for a final decision on certain permit applications under existing leases.
Directs the Secretary to extend by one year the terms of certain oil and gas leases (covered leases) for the Gulf of Mexico outer Continental Shelf (OCS) region.
Establishes any district court within the Fifth Circuit as the exclusive venue for civil actions relating to covered energy projects on leased federal land in the Gulf of Mexico unless there is no proper venue within that circuit.
Bars such a civil action unless it is filed within 60 days after the final federal action to which it relates.
Sets forth a standard of review under which: (1) the court is directed to hear and determine any covered civil action as expeditiously as possible; and (2) any judicial review of a covered civil action makes a presumption that the administrative findings and conclusions relating to the challenged federal action or decision are correct.
Sets restrictions on prospective relief.
Prohibits federal payment of attorneys' fees, expenses, and other court costs to any party in a covered civil action under this Act.
People & committees
Sen. McConnell, Mitch [R-KY] · R–KY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Motion to proceed to consideration of measure, under the order of 5/16/2011, not having achieved 60 votes in the affirmative, withdrawn in Senate. (consideration: CR S3086)
Motion to proceed to consideration of measure, under the order of 5/16/2011, not having achieved 60 votes in the affirmative, rejected in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 42 - 57. Record Vote Number: 73. (consideration: CR S3086)
Senate roll call 73 · Individual votesMotion to proceed to measure considered in Senate. (consideration: CR S3069-3086)
Motion to proceed to consideration of measure by Senator Reid made in Senate. (consideration: CR S3013)
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 43. (text of measure as introduced in Senate: CR S2931-2932)
Introduced in the Senate. Read the first time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 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 S.953 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.953 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.953 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.953 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.