PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jul 20, 2017
King Cove Road Land Exchange Act
(Sec. 4) This bill declares that, if the state of Alaska offers to convey to the Department of the Interior 43,093 acres of state-owned land, Interior shall convey to Alaska, in exchange, 206 acres of federal land within the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge and 131 acres of federal land within the Izembek Wilderness, for purposes of: (1) designating a road corridor through the refuge, and (2) constructing a single-lane gravel road along the road corridor.
The values of the federal and nonfederal lands to be exchanged: (1) shall be equal, or (2) if not equal, shall be equalized in accordance with this bill.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Interior and Alaska shall select an appraiser to conduct appraisals of the federal and nonfederal lands in accordance with nationally recognized appraisal standards.
Upon completion of the exchange of the federal and nonfederal lands: (1) the boundary of the Wilderness shall be adjusted to exclude the federal land, and (2) the nonfederal land shall be added to the Wilderness.
(Sec. 5) The bill requires the route of the road corridor to follow a specified southern road alignment.
(Sec. 6) The bill makes the requirements relating to the usage, barrier cables, and dimensions and the limitation on the location of support facilities with regard to the construction of a single-lane gravel road between the communities of King Cove and Cold Bay, Alaska (as set forth under the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009) applicable to the road to be constructed in the road corridor.
(Sec. 7) The bill states that the exchange of the federal and nonfederal lands and the road to be constructed under this bill (including the issuance of any permit that may be required from any federal agency to construct such road) shall not constitute a major federal action requiring environmental impact review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
People & committees
Rep. Young, Don [R-AK-At Large] · R–AK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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 passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 248 - 179 (Roll no. 406). (text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H6124-6125)
House roll call 406 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 248 - 179 (Roll no. 406).(text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H6124-6125)
House roll call 406 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by voice vote.
The previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Garamendi motion to recommit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to require the bill to be reported back to the House with an amendment to add a provision to the underlying bill requiring the road to be constructed using only materials and equipment manufactured in the United States.
Mr. Garamendi moved to recommit with instructions to the Committee on Natural Resources. (text: CR H6130)
The House adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
The previous question was ordered without objection.
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 218.
The House resolved into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration.
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H6128-6131)
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union rises leaving H.R. 218 as unfinished business.
On motion that the Committee rise Agreed to by voice vote.
Mr. Bishop (UT) moved that the Committee rise.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Grijalva amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Grijalva demanded a recorded vote, and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 454, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Grijalva amendment No. 3.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 454, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Young (AK) amendment No. 2.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Tsongas amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Ms. Tsongas demanded a recorded vote, and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 454, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Tsongas amendment No. 1.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 218.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Gary J. Palmer to act as Chairman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 454 and Rule XVIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2910, H.R. 2883 and H.R. 218. The resolution makes in order at anytime on the legislative day of July 20, 2017, for the Speaker to entertain motions that the House suspend the rules, relating to the bill H.R. 2825. Also the rule provides that the Committee on Appropriations may at any time before 5 p.m. on Friday, July 21, 2017, file privileged reports to accompany measures making appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2018.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 454. (consideration: CR H6120-6128)
Rule H. Res. 454 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 454 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2910, H.R. 2883 and H.R. 218. The resolution makes in order at anytime on the legislative day of July 20, 2017, for the Speaker to entertain motions that the House suspend the rules, relating to the bill H.R. 2825. Also the rule provides that the Committee on Appropriations may at any time before 5 p.m. on Friday, July 21, 2017, file privileged reports to accompany measures making appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2018.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 153.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 115-218.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 115-218.
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 23 - 14.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Lands.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.218 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.218 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.218 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.218 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.