PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.2869 / 108th Congress

Northern Nevada Rural Economic Development and Land Consolidation Act of 2003

Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 24, 2003

Northern Nevada Rural Economic Development and Land Consolidation Act of 2003 - Directs the Secretary of the Interior, upon the submission of the relevant application or applications by the Placer Dome U.S. Inc., Denver, Co., and Graymont Western U.S. Inc., Murray, Utah (together the Claimant), to sell the Claimant whatever portion is requested of certain public lands subject to mining operations in Eureka, Lander, White Pine, Elko, and Humboldt Counties, Nevada. Directs that the sale of the lands be at market price. States that the value of locatable minerals in such lands shall not be considered or included in the market value of the lands.

Subjects all public lands conveyed under this Act to a royalty payable to the United States on locatable minerals, except for lands subject to unpatented mining claims for which the Claimant demonstrates the discovery of a valuable mineral deposit. Directs the Secretary to accept from the Claimant a conveyance of any of certain specified private lands in northern Nevada, with the Claimant to receive a credit equal to the market value of each such transferred property.

Subjects all lands conveyed under this Act to valid existing rights.

Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.

Read full official summaryShow less

Directs that the proceeds from the sales of the lands be used: (1) to support the State's general education program; (2) to support a trust fund for the California Trail Interpretative Center in Elko County; (3) for the rehabilitation of lands in Nevada that were subject to historic mining activities; and (4) for the reimbursement of costs incurred by the Nevada State Office and relevant Field Offices of the Bureau of Land Management in conducting the sales.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Gibbons, Jim [R-NV-2] · R–NV

Committees

  • Natural Resources Committee
1 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands.

  2. Executive Comment Requested from Interior.

  3. Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.

  4. Referred to the House Committee on Resources.

  5. Introduced in House

  6. Introduced in House

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

Source last updated: Aug 18, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.R.2869 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.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.R.2869 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.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.R.2869 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.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.R.2869 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.

View full prompt & sources