A Democratic bill with 4 Democratic cosponsors · See all 4 cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This legislation, titled the Stop Orphaned Wells Act, aims to address the growing issue of abandoned and orphaned oil and gas wells on Federal and Indian lands. It amends the Mineral Leasing Act to tighten financial assurance and bonding requirements for operators before they begin work. The bill bans nationwide bonds and sets specific minimum dollar amounts for individual leases and state-level operations. Additionally, it establishes new "fitness to operate" standards and stricter rules for transferring leases to ensure operators can pay for cleanup. The measure also places tighter timelines on idled, temporarily abandoned, and shut-in wells to prevent them from becoming future hazards. Ultimately, the goal is to make sure oil and gas companies, rather than taxpayers, pay to clean up disturbed land and water.
Yes· 3 of 9
- Scored +7
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
The bill mandates stricter cleanup timelines for idled and temporarily abandoned wells and requires higher financial assurances to prevent orphaned wells.
- Scored +6
Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests?
The legislation protects public lands and water resources by enforcing rigorous reclamation requirements and fitness-to-operate standards for oil and gas leases.
- Scored +5
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The bill requires the Department of the Interior to publicly post proposed lease transfers online for public comment and maintain an updated database of idled wells.
The opposite
- Scored -5
Does this make it easier to run a small business?
Eliminating nationwide bonding and imposing high minimum bond amounts creates significant financial hurdles for smaller independent operators.
- Scored -4
Would business owners be better off under this?
Increased minimum bonding amounts and stricter compliance hurdles create higher operational costs for energy business owners.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Protection of taxpayer funds: By requiring significantly higher and more specific financial bonds before operations begin, the bill ensures that companies pay for cleanup costs rather than forcing the public to foot the bill. This is covered under Section 3, which outlines new financial assurance requirements and eliminates nationwide bonding.
-
Stricter environmental and safety cleanup: The bill mandates that operators handle temporarily abandoned or shut-in wells within specific timeframes or return them to active beneficial use, reducing environmental risks. This is found in Section 3, which adds regulations for temporarily abandoned and shut-in wells.
-
Accountability for lease transfers: Section 5 establishes strict financial and compliance checks before an oil and gas lease can be transferred to a new owner, which helps prevent financially unstable companies from taking over leases and walking away from cleanup obligations.
-
Public involvement: Section 5 requires the Department of the Interior to post proposed lease transfers online and invite public comments for at least thirty days, giving everyday citizens a voice in who operates on public lands.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Higher operational costs for smaller businesses: The elimination of nationwide financial assurances and the establishment of high minimum bond amounts, such as $200,000 for an individual lease or $650,000 for all leases in a state, could create severe financial hurdles for smaller independent operators. These burdens are detailed in Section 3.
-
Strict debt-to-equity barriers: Under Section 5, the Secretary of the Interior must deny lease transfers if a subsidiary company fails to demonstrate a strict debt-to-equity ratio of less than 2 to 1, unless a parent company provides an unconditional corporate guarantee. This could unnecessarily restrict normal business transactions and corporate structures.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — The bill mandates stricter cleanup timelines for idled and temporarily abandoned wells and requires higher financial assurances to prevent orphaned wells. Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests? — The legislation protects public lands and water resources by enforcing rigorous reclamation requirements and fitness-to-operate standards for oil and gas leases.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill requires the Department of the Interior to publicly post proposed lease transfers online for public comment and maintain an updated database of idled wells. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill expands federal oversight by instituting mandatory fitness-to-operate standards and strict lease transfer reviews by the Department of the Interior.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Reducing the prevalence of abandoned and orphaned oil and gas wells safeguards rural land and water resources from environmental hazards. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Protecting public funds from being used for well cleanup ensures taxpayer dollars remain available for public needs. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Ensuring that private corporations rather than taxpayers finance environmental remediation prevents public burdens. Would business owners be better off under this? — Increased minimum bonding amounts and stricter compliance hurdles create higher operational costs for energy business owners.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make the government pay for what it commits to? — The legislation establishes stricter financial assurance and accountability standards to ensure operators cover environmental remediation costs. Does this reduce what the federal government owes? — By requiring higher bonding amounts and ensuring oil and gas operators rather than taxpayers pay for well reclamation, the bill protects public funds. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Eliminating nationwide bonding and imposing high minimum bond amounts creates significant financial hurdles for smaller independent operators.
- 9/30/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
- 4 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
John HickenlooperDemocrat · Colorado
Ben LujánDemocrat · New Mexico
Alex PadillaDemocrat · California
Adam SchiffDemocrat · California