PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 103-253.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jun 21, 1993
Clear Creek County, Colorado, Public Lands Transfer Act of 1993 - Directs the Secretary of the Interior to transfer certain public lands in Clear Creek County, Colorado, to the Secretary of Agriculture, the State of Colorado, and certain local governments (Clear Creek County and the towns of Silver Plume and Georgetown). Withdraws the public lands transferred to Colorado and the local governments from U.S. mining and mineral leasing laws. Requires the consent of the Secretary before the grantee or its successor can transfer the title of such conveyed lands. Makes the grantee liable to the Secretary for the fair market value of such conveyed lands if such lands are devoted to a use inconsistent with limitations under this Act or transferred to another party. Relieves: (1) the Secretary from being required to inspect any public lands described in this Act or to inform Clear Creek County or any member of the public regarding the condition of such lands with respect to the presence or absence of hazardous substances or otherwise; and (2) the United States from liability regarding hazardous wastes or substances placed on such lands after their transfer to the ownership of another party. Modifies the boundaries of the Arapaho National Forest, Colorado, to include certain lands conveyed to the Secretary of Agriculture.
People & committees
Rep. Skaggs, David E. [D-CO-2] · D–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 103-253.
Became Public Law No: 103-253.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendments Agreed to by voice vote. (consideration: CR H3209)
Resolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendments Agreed to by voice vote.(consideration: CR H3209)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Mr. Vento moved that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendments.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment and an amendment to the Title by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S4180-4181)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment and an amendment to the Title by Voice Vote.(consideration: CR S4180-4181)
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources received executive comment from Department of Agriculture. Favorable.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 372.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Johnston with amendments and an amendment to the title. With written report No. 103-228.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Johnston with amendments and an amendment to the title. With written report No. 103-228.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with amendments favorably.
Subcommittee on Public Lands, National Parks. Hearings held.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources requested executive comment from Department of the Interior, Department of Agriculture, and Office of Management and Budget.
Referred to Subcommittee on Public Lands, National Parks.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3841-3844)
Mr. Vento moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 77.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 103-141.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 103-141.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended).
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E435)
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: Sep 8, 2026. 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.1134 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.1134 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.1134 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.1134 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.