7 versions

CosmeticWhat changed in ENROLLED BILLcompared with REFERRED IN SENATE (Jun 3, 2026)

Technical corrections only. The differences between v4 and v6 reflect the bill's progression through the legislative process, from being referred in the Senate to becoming an enrolled bill. There are no substantive policy changes to the text of the Act itself.

Skipping v5 (REPORTED TO SENATE). Those versions changed too little to need their own analysis, so they reuse REFERRED IN SENATE's. Changes are measured from the most recent version analyzed on its own.

H.R. 7831119th CongressIntroduced Mar 5, 2026

License to Drill Act

Became Public LawEnergySubstantive

View bill text

Sponsor: Rep. Kennedy, Mike [R-UT-3]
Committees: Energy and Natural Resources Committee (primary)
Last action: Oct 20, 2026

This analysis was written for v4 (REFERRED IN SENATE, Jun 3, 2026). ENROLLED BILL changed too little to need its own, so it reuses that one rather than a rewrite. The differences between the two are summarized above. View v4

Bottom line

The bill extends a fee on new oil and gas drilling permit applications on federal lands for an additional 11 years, directing the revenue to a dedicated fund for improving permit processing.

What it actually does

This bill extends the period during which the Secretary of the Interior is required to collect a fee for each new application for a permit to drill (APD) on federal lands. The current fee collection authority, set to expire in 2026, would be prolonged until 2037. Additionally, for fiscal years 2027 through 2037, all collected fees are mandated to be transferred to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Permit Processing Improvement Fund.

Proponents argue

Supporters argue that extending this fee ensures continued, dedicated funding for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to efficiently process drilling permits, which helps reduce backlogs and improves service for energy companies. This stable funding mechanism supports the agency's capacity to manage federal lands and resources effectively, ultimately benefiting both government operations and industry stakeholders.

Opponents contend

Opponents might contend that extending this fee imposes an additional financial burden on energy producers, potentially increasing the cost of domestic oil and gas development and discouraging investment. Concerns could also be raised about the long-term necessity or effectiveness of the fee, or whether alternative funding mechanisms might be more equitable or efficient.

The bill is exceptionally short and uses clear language, making it very accessible for any reader to understand its provisions thoroughly within a short timeframe.

Section 2, paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of H.R. 7831, amending Section 35(d) of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 191(d))

Extension of BLM Oil and Gas Permit Processing Fee and Fund Allocation

prominently featuredstraightforward

This provision amends the Mineral Leasing Act to extend the requirement for the Secretary of the Interior to collect a fee for each new application for a permit to drill (APD) on federal lands. The current authority, which was set to expire in 2026, is extended to 2037. Furthermore, it specifies that for fiscal years 2027 through 2037, all fees collected under this subsection must be transferred to the BLM Permit Processing Improvement Fund, ensuring dedicated resources for the agency's permit processing operations.

GroupImpactMechanismScale

GroupOil and Gas CompaniesImpactContinued financial cost for new drilling permit applications on federal lands.MechanismPayment of a fee per application for an additional 11 years.ScaleApplies to all new applications for permits to drill on federal lands from 2027 through 2037.

GroupBureau of Land Management (BLM)ImpactContinued dedicated funding for improving the efficiency and capacity of its permit processing operations.MechanismDirect transfer of all collected fees to the BLM Permit Processing Improvement Fund for fiscal years 2027-2037.ScaleProvides a stable, user-funded revenue stream for an additional 11 fiscal years to support administrative functions.

Supporters argue

Supporters argue that extending this fee provides essential and stable funding for the BLM to maintain and enhance the efficiency of its permit processing system. This ensures that the agency can adequately staff and equip itself to handle permit applications in a timely manner, which ultimately benefits the energy industry by reducing delays and improving predictability.

Critics contend

Critics might argue that extending this fee increases the regulatory burden and operational costs for oil and gas companies, potentially hindering domestic energy production and investment. Some may question whether the fee is the most effective or equitable way to fund BLM's operations, or if it disproportionately impacts smaller operators.

Tradeoffs

The provision navigates the tension between ensuring that the government agency responsible for permitting has sufficient resources to operate efficiently and minimizing the financial burden on the industry that relies on those permits. It seeks to create a self-sustaining funding model for a specific administrative function, balancing public service provision with industry cost recovery.

About this analysis. AI-Generated from the official bill text and available committee reports. Gaps in available data are noted explicitly. Verify important details with the official Congress.gov record.