PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to Subcommittee on Forests and Public Lands.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 14, 1995
Directs the Secretary of the Interior to transfer to the Water Conservancy District of Washington County, Utah, the Sand Hollow Site, the Quail Creek Pipeline, and the Quail Creek Reservoir, if the District offers to transfer to the United States the Bulloch Site in Kane County, excluding water rights. Withdraws the mineral interests underlying the Sand Hollow Site, the Quail Creek Reservoir, and the Quail Creek Pipeline from disposition under the public land laws, from location, entry, and patent under U.S. mining laws, and from the operation of the U.S. mineral leasing laws, the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970, and the Act of July 31, 1947. Conditions the exchange of lands upon the District's agreement to continue to permit the grazing of domestic livestock on the Sand Hollow Site under existing Federal grazing leases or permits.
People & committees
Rep. Hansen, James V. [R-UT-1] · R–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to Subcommittee on Forests and Public Lands.
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 Agreed to by voice vote.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H11799-11801)
Mr. Cooley moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 158.
Reported by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 104-306.
Reported by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 104-306.
Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Lands.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
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.1838 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.1838 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.1838 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.1838 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.