PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 15, 2001
Mining Claim Maintenance Act of 2001 - Requires: (1) the holder of each unpatented mining claim, mill, or tunnel site (except for certain patent applicants and claimants holding ten or fewer mining claims) to pay to the Secretary of the Interior an annual claim maintenance fee of $100 per claim in lieu of specified statutory assessment work requirements; and (2) the locator of every unpatented mining claim, mill, or tunnel site to pay a location fee of $25 per claim in addition to the claim maintenance fee.Prohibits the issuance of any Federal mining patent or mill site claim, unless: (1) the patent application was filed on or before September 30, 1994; and (2) specified requirements for vein or lode claims and placer claims were fully complied with.
People & committees
Rep. Rahall, Nick J., II [D-WV-3] · D–WV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E373)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 19, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1085 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1085 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1085 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1085 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.