On the recordJuly 13, 2016
These leases were put up for lease in 2017-2022. We are not asking for any additional new leases. We are asking for the leases that remain in the sales. Then we address the environmental issue as the sales take place before we have development. I am suggesting, respectfully, if we don't have those areas open, the 3 Arctic Sale areas, then the leases will not be issued in any other area. Oil is not where you want it to be--it is where it is. I am saying we can address all of the issues the gentlewoman is concerned with after the sales take place and we receive the money. If it can't be done safely, it can be stopped at that time. This happened with Shell. I am just saying not to let an agency or an administration get ahead of itself and say, ``Oh, we are going to take the leases back.'' That is the prerogative of an agency, yes; but the leases were put up to begin with, so we ought to take and accept that. Let's go through the process, and the process will follow through. Then we will decide on the environmental impact, on the culture. Then we will have the way to do it right and correctly. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, obviously, we disagree once again. My concern is that this amendment would mandate the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management to include specific areas in the 2017-2022 lease sale schedule and that the Bureau needs to uphold the law.…





