PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Lands.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 21, 2015
Amends the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 to apply certain requirements for permits and leases for domestic livestock grazing on National Forest System lands issued by the Department of Agriculture (USDA) regardless of where located.
Requires the terms and conditions in a grazing permit or lease that has been waived to be continued under a new permit or lease until the Department of the Interior (respecting public lands) or USDA completes any environmental analysis and documentation for an allotment management plan required under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and other applicable laws.
Allows the categorical exclusion of an allotment management plan by Interior or USDA from the requirement to prepare an Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement under NEPA if: (1) the issued allotment management plan continues the current grazing management of the allotment, and (2) the Department concerned has assessed and evaluated the grazing allotment associated with such management plan.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(A "categorical exclusion" under NEPA is a category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment and which have been found to have no such effect in procedures adopted by a federal agency in implementing environmental regulations and for which, therefore, neither an Environmental Assessment nor an Environmental Impact Statement is required.)
People & committees
Rep. Hice, Jody B. [R-GA-10] · R–GA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Lands.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Conservation and Forestry.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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: Apr 7, 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.1897 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.1897 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.1897 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.1897 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.