Contents

BoemEdit

Boem (the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management) is a federal agency within the Department of the Interior charged with stewarding the United States’ offshore energy resources on the Outer Continental Shelf. Created in 2011 through the reorganization of the former Minerals Management Service into separate entities, Boem brings together leasing, permitting, and environmental review responsibilities for offshore oil, gas, and renewable energy projects. The agency operates at the intersection of energy security, coastal economies, and environmental safeguards, aiming to balance resource development with prudent stewardship and transparent public engagement.

Boem’s scope includes administering offshore leasing programs, issuing permits for exploration and production, and overseeing siting for renewable energy projects such as offshore wind. It conducts or coordinates environmental assessments and impact analyses under the National Environmental Policy Act (National Environmental Policy Act), and it works in partnership with other federal offices, including the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement on safety and compliance, as well as with state regulators and local stakeholders. In parallel, Boem helps ensure that revenue from offshore leasing benefits federal programs and local communities, while the United States adds to its energy mix through a combination of domestic production and domestic supply assurance.

From an economic perspective, Boem plays a key role in energy independence, maritime supply chains, and regional employment in coastal areas. Offshore drilling and offshore wind projects can generate jobs in exploration, construction, operation, and maintenance, along with royalties and fees that support federal budgets and coastal infrastructure. The agency’s decisions influence energy prices in tandem with global market dynamics, while also shaping the competitiveness of domestic industries that rely on reliable, affordable energy.

Boem’s activities touch multiple communities and ecosystems. The agency conducts environmental reviews intended to minimize harm to marine life, preserves navigational and fishing interests, and considers the livelihoods of communities that depend on the coast. The balance between resource extraction and environmental protection is a constant point of national debate, as policymakers weigh the benefits of energy supply against potential risks to fisheries, tourism, and coastal resilience in the face of climate-related challenges.

History and mandate

Boem traces its institutional lineage to the Minerals Management Service (MMS), which managed offshore resources for several decades. After the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster, the MMS was reorganized to separate resource management from safety enforcement and revenue collection. The result was the creation of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (Boem) for energy development and the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement for safety regulation, along with the Office of Natural Resources Revenue (ONRR) for royalty collection. This restructuring aimed to provide clearer lines of responsibility, improve safety oversight, and enhance accountability in offshore activities.

The agency’s mandate stems from the law governing offshore resources, including the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, which authorizes the federal government to manage energy exploration and development on the U.S. outer continental shelf. Boem operates under this framework to plan, lease, permit, and regulate offshore activities, while coordinating with other federal agencies (for example, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration on environmental monitoring) and with affected states. The agency also aligns its work with state and local priorities, balancing economic development with environmental safeguards and public safety.

Functions and responsibilities

  • Offshore leasing and licensing: Boem conducts competitive lease sales for offshore oil and gas and for offshore wind, establishes terms and conditions, and issues exploration and development permits.

  • Renewable energy siting: The agency coordinates the permitting and regulatory framework for offshore wind and other renewable energy projects on the Outer Continental Shelf, seeking to diversify the nation’s energy mix while considering fisheries, navigation, and environmental resources.

  • Environmental review and protection: Under NEPA, Boem requires environmental impact analyses to assess potential effects on marine ecosystems, air quality, and coastal communities. It works with science agencies to monitor impacts and to implement safeguards.

  • Safety and compliance oversight: While Boem shares safety duties with BSEE, it integrates safety considerations into planning and permitting processes, aiming to minimize risk and ensure transparent regulatory standards.

  • Revenue and economics: Boem administers leasing auctions and tracks royalties and revenues from offshore energy projects, with portions directed toward federal programs and affected communities.

  • Resource data and planning: The agency collects and analyzes data on offshore resources, ecology, and geophysical conditions to support responsible decision-making and long-term planning for energy resources.

  • Public engagement and transparency: Boem maintains processes for public comment, stakeholder input, and interagency coordination, seeking to balance domestic energy needs with environmental and community considerations.

Legal and regulatory framework

Boem operates within a framework that includes the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, the Mineral Leasing Act, and related environmental and safety statutes. Its work is shaped by NEPA requirements, which mandate evaluation of environmental impacts and consideration of alternatives. The agency coordinates with BSEE on safety standards and with other federal and state agencies to harmonize environmental protections with energy development. This regulatory environment is designed to provide predictable rules for industry while protecting public resources and coastal communities.

Economic and policy debates

Proponents of Boem’s approach emphasize energy security, job creation, and taxpayer value from offshore resources. By expanding access to domestic energy, the United States can reduce vulnerability to foreign energy markets and potentially stabilize prices, while the revenue supports public budgets. Supporters also argue that offshore wind and other renewables can complement traditional energy sources, contributing to a more resilient and diversified energy portfolio.

Critics contend that offshore energy development carries environmental risks, including potential harm to marine life, seabirds, and sensitive habitats, as well as possible spill responses and long-term ecological effects. They may advocate for tighter restrictions, slower leasing, or greater emphasis on more stringent environmental safeguards. The debate often centers on the pace and scale of leasing, the adequacy of safety and environmental protections, and the distribution of costs and benefits between coastal communities and national energy interests.

In offshore wind, proponents highlight local job creation and long-term emissions reductions through clean energy. Opponents express concerns about impacts on fisheries, navigation, and tourism, particularly in regions with existing coastal economies. Boem’s role in balancing these interests is at the heart of policy discussions about how to transition to a more secure energy mix while preserving ecological integrity and the livelihoods of people who rely on the coast.

Critics from the environmental policy spectrum sometimes argue that climate goals warrant more aggressive restrictions on offshore activities. A practical counterpoint from supporters is that prudent, technology-enabled safeguards and rigorous accountability can allow offshore energy to proceed with lower risk than in past decades, while continuing to advance emissions reduction through the broader energy portfolio, including improvements in efficiency and the growth of renewables. Some observers maintain that a vigorous domestic energy program can coexist with environmental stewardship, provided the regulatory framework is transparent, predictable, and enforceable.

Woke criticisms—arguments that emphasize rapid shifts away from fossil energy and sweeping policy changes—are often described in policy debates as too disruptive or economically costly. A pragmatic view in this context argues that Boem’s mission is not to choose a single technology but to manage risk and opportunity across the energy spectrum, enabling steady progress toward energy reliability and affordability while applying strict safety and environmental standards. Critics of such critiques may contend that dismissing incremental, technically feasible improvements ignores the realities of energy markets and the need to protect coastal economies from volatility.

See also