Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management relating to "Protection of Marine Archaeological Resources".
- Bill Number
- H.J.Res. 62
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Public Lands and Natural Resources
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-02-26: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- Last Updated
- 2025-07-02T22:01:45Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose of the Legislation
This joint resolution (H.J. Res. 62) aims to block a specific federal rule issued by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), an agency within the Department of the Interior. The rule focuses on protecting underwater historical sites and artifacts, such as shipwrecks. By disapproving it, Congress seeks to prevent the rule from taking effect, using a process called the Congressional Review Act (CRA), which lets lawmakers quickly overturn certain agency regulations.
Key Provisions
- Disapproval of the Rule: The resolution explicitly rejects the BOEM rule titled "Protection of Marine Archaeological Resources," published in the Federal Register on September 3, 2024 (89 Fed. Reg. 71160).
- Nullification: If passed, the rule would have no legal force or effect, meaning it could not be enforced.
- Legislative Process: Introduced in the House on February 26, 2025, by Representative Ezell and referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources for review.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- This resolution does not create new laws but invokes the CRA to override an existing agency rule finalized in 2024.
- It would reverse the rule's updates to how BOEM manages and protects marine archaeological resources during ocean energy activities (like offshore drilling or renewable energy projects), potentially reverting protections to prior standards without the new safeguards.
- Under the CRA, once disapproved, the rule cannot be reissued in a substantially similar form without new congressional approval.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: BOEM's ability to regulate ocean activities for cultural heritage protection would be limited, possibly shifting more responsibility to other agencies or states. This could streamline permitting for energy projects but reduce federal oversight of archaeological sites.
- On Citizens: Coastal communities, historians, and the public interested in preserving underwater cultural heritage (e.g., shipwrecks as historical treasures) might see fewer protections, potentially increasing risks to these sites from development. Energy workers and businesses could benefit from fewer regulatory hurdles.
- On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, though it could affect U.S. compliance with international agreements on cultural heritage at sea, such as UNESCO conventions, if protections weaken.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM): Directly impacted as the rule's creator; disapproval would undermine its regulatory authority.
- Energy Industry: Offshore oil, gas, and renewable energy companies (e.g., wind farm developers) would gain from reduced compliance costs and faster project approvals.
- Archaeologists and Cultural Preservation Groups: Nonprofits, museums, and experts in marine history could face challenges in protecting sites, leading to potential loss of archaeological resources.
- Environmental and Indigenous Groups: Those advocating for ocean conservation or cultural sites tied to Native American history might oppose the disapproval, seeing it as a setback for heritage protection.
- Congress and Taxpayers: Reinforces congressional oversight of executive agencies, potentially saving federal resources on enforcement.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Relies on the CRA (enacted in 1996), a tool for Congress to review and veto agency rules within 60 legislative days of submission. If enacted, it sets a precedent for quick reversals of environmental or cultural regulations without full legislative debate.
- Constitutional: Highlights the separation of powers, with Congress checking executive branch rulemaking under Article I (legislative authority). No major constitutional challenges are evident, but it could invite lawsuits from affected parties if the rule's nullification harms protected interests.
- Political: Introduced in the 119th Congress (2025–2026), it reflects partisan divides on regulation—often supported by those favoring deregulation for industry growth. Passage requires simple majorities in both chambers and presidential signature (or veto override), making it a tool for influencing policy without new laws.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (2)
Rep. Bice, Stephanie I. [R-OK-5], Rep. Higgins, Clay [R-LA-3]
Recent Actions
- 2025-02-26: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- 2025-02-26: Introduced in House
- 2025-02-26: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management relating to "Protection of Marine Archaeological Resources". — issued 2025-02-26 — PDF (1 pages)